does digital transformation of government lead to enhanced citizens' trust and confidence in

Does Digital Transformation of Government Lead to Enhanced Citizens’ Trust and

Confidence in Government?

A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

By

Mohamed Mahmood

Brunel Business School

Brunel University

United Kingdom

2017

i

Acknowledgements

Praise be to Allah, the Almighty, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the Universe, and peace and

blessings be upon his Prophet Mohamed.

First and foremost, I would like to thank my PhD supervisor, Professor Vishanth Weerakkody, for

his excellent supervision throughout my PhD. His guidance enabled me to unitize my abilities

towards getting things done, despite it being hard for me to work on the delegated actions at certain

times. Throughout my PhD, he was available for supervision even across countries, which made

my PhD smooth and enjoyable. His encouragement and inspirations kept me motivated through

the difficult phases of my PhD. I hope to maintain this relationship with my supervisor to produce

more competitive work in future.

Furthermore, I greatly appreciate Professor Mansoor Alaali, my second supervisor. His continued

feedback helped me a lot through the Ph.D journey, despite his busy schedule as the President of

the Ahlia University.

I owe special thanks to my mother for her continuous prayers and endless support. She always

wanted to see the day I complete this journey successfully. Moreover, my greatest thanks to my

sister and family members for their never failing support, which has been a great source of

motivation in this journey. My special thanks to Ms. Esra for being with me all the way, without

whom, I would not have completed this journey. I cannot find proper words to express my

appreciation for Esra.

I extend my thanks to all of my friends for their continuous encouragement, support and prayers;

special words of gratitude go to Dr. Khalid, Marwan, Ahmed Bukhowa, Hisham and Abdullatif

for being with me through this entire process.

Lastly, I would like to thank my country, Kingdom of Bahrain, for being my pride throughout my

Ph.D journey.

ii

Declaration

Some of the material contained herein has been presented in the following publications:

Journal Papers Published, Under Review and Rejected with Recommendations

[J4] Mahmood, M., Weerakkody, V. and Chen, W. (2017) ‘The Role of ICT in the

Transformation of Government and Citizen Trust ’, Journal of Public Administration

Review. (Under Review)

[J3] Mahmood, M., Weerakkody, V. and Chen, W. (2017) ‘The role of ICT in

Transformation of Government and its Influence on Citizens’ Trust’, Management

Information Systems Quarterly. (Rejected)

Although the submitted manuscript to the MISQ was rejected, it went through a

full review process that lasted around 3 months and involved 5 reviewers (Senior

Editor, Associate Editor and Three Reviewers). The subject and the identified

knowledge gap in the submitted manuscript were found to be interesting by the 5

reviewers. However, the paper was rejected with positive comments and the

authors were advised by the editor to submit an enhanced version of the

manuscript (taking into account the comments and proposed suggestions) to a

public administration journal such as the Journal of Public Administration

Research and Theory (JPART) and Public Administration Review (PAR); Hence

J4.

[J2] Mahmood, M., Weerakkody, V. and Chen, W. (2016) ‘The Influence of Transformed

Government on Citizens’ Trust’, Journal of Information Technology for Development.

(Awaiting final acceptance following the fifth review of the manuscript)

[J1] Mahmood, M. (2016) ‘Enhancing Citizens’ Trust and Confidence in Government through

Digital Transformation’, International Journal of Electronic Government Research,

Volume 12(1), pp. 99-110

iii

Conference Papers Accepted and Published

[C3] Mahmood, M., and Weerakkody, V. (2016) ‘Factors Affecting Citizens’ Trust and Confidence

in Government and Its Relation with Transformation of Government’, Proceedings of the

22nd Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS-16).

[C2] Mahmood, M. (2015) ‘Enhancing Citizens Trust and Confidence in Government through

Digital Transformation’, pre-ICIS workshop on eGovernment, 2015 International

Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2015).

[C1] Mahmood, M., and Weerakkody, V. (2014) ‘Digital government diffusion in Bahrain – The

role of trust and its influence on adoption’, Proceedings of the 11th European,

Mediterranean & Middle Eastern Conference on Information Systems (EMCIS 2014).

Ph.D Symposium Papers Accepted and Presented

[S3] Mahmood, M., Weerakkody, V. and Alaali, M. (2017) ‘The Influence of Transformed

Government on Citizens’ Trust’, Ph.D Symposium. Bahrain (the 8th Doctoral

Symposium 2017). (Best Paper Award)

[S2] Mahmood, M., Weerakkody, V. and Alaali , M. (2016) ‘The role of Trust and Its

Influence on E-Government Adoption’, Ph.D Symposium. Bahrain (the 7th

Doctoral Symposium 2016).

[S1] Mahmood, M., Weerakkody, V. and Alaali , M. (2015) ‘Citizens’ Trust and

Confidence in Government and Its Relation with Transformation of Government’,

Ph.D Symposium. Bahrain (the 6th Doctoral Symposium 2015). (Best Paper

Award)

iv

Appreciation and Recognition

[1] Winner of the Best Paper Award at the 6th Doctoral Symposium 2015.

[2] Following presenting successfully the paper titled “Factors Affecting Citizens’ Trust and

Confidence in Government and Its Relation with Transformation of Government” at the 22nd

Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS-16), the Journal of Information

Technology for Development invited the Authors of this paper to submit an extended version of

the AMCIS-16 paper.

[3] Winner of Best Paper Award at the 8th Doctoral Symposium 2017.

v

Abstract

Over the years, citizens’ trust and confidence in their governments has continued to decline and

digital government is expected to reverse this trend. An enormous amount of money has been

spent, worldwide, on electronic government initiatives that are focused on improving performance,

reducing costs and enhancing citizens’ trust and confidence in their governments. Yet, of the many

initiatives that have been implemented, very few have achieved real transformation of government

(i.e. fundamental changes to the way core functions of government are performed to achieve

noticeable gains in performance and efficiency). As such, there is a need to understand how

transformation of government as a construct affects citizens’ trust and confidence in government

in the presence of factors such as, government performance and citizen satisfaction. This research

empirically investigates the influence of digital transformation of government on citizens’ trust

and confidence in the context of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Bahrain is a top ranking country in terms

of use of ICT in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region.

A conceptual model was developed and validated using an online survey targeting randomly

citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain. Based on 313 responses, the findings of this research suggest

that citizens’ trust and confidence in their government is positively influenced by transformation

of government, mediated by government performance and citizens’ satisfaction. The study found

that e-government and technology are not enough for achieving a real transformation of

government, and therefore, in tackling the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

Other factors were found to be important in this equation, including transparency and

accountability of government functions and activities in meeting citizens’ expectations. The

research offers multiple policy implications and theoretical contributions, in addition to helping

understand how digital transformation of government can enhance citizens’ trust and confidence

in government, improve government-to-citizen relationship, and increase the adoption of digital

services offered by governments. From a policy perspective, this research offers a validated

conceptual model that can be used as a frame of reference when planning ICT-enabled

transformation projects in government. From a theoretical context, this study is the first to

investigate the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government.

vi

Table of Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... i

Declaration ...................................................................................................................................... ii

Appreciation and Recognition ....................................................................................................... iv

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... v

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... vi

Chapter 1 : Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Research Background ....................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Research Problem and Gap .............................................................................................. 3

1.4 Research Aim and Objectives .......................................................................................... 7

1.5 Significance of the Research ............................................................................................ 7

1.6 Research Methodology ..................................................................................................... 9

1.7 Research Outline .............................................................................................................. 9

1.8 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................... 11

Chapter 2 : Literature Review ....................................................................................................... 14

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 14

2.2 Research Context: Status of E- Government in Bahrain ................................................ 17

2.3 Trust and Confidence in Government ............................................................................ 19

2.3.1 Relationship between Confidence and Trust .......................................................... 21

2.3.2 Theories on Citizen Trust and Confidence ............................................................. 23

2.4 Transformation of Government ...................................................................................... 24

2.4.1 Theory on Transformation of Government .................................................................. 27

2.5 E-government and its Relationship with Transformation of Government, and Citizens’

Trust and Confidence ................................................................................................................ 27

2.6 Technology and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and Citizen Trust

and Confidence ......................................................................................................................... 28

2.7 Citizen Expectations and their Relationship with Transformation of Government and

Citizen Trust and Confidence in Government .......................................................................... 29

2.8 Transparency and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and Citizen

Trust and Confidence in Government ....................................................................................... 30

2.9 Accountability and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and Citizen

Trust and Confidence in Government ....................................................................................... 30

2.10 Theories supporting Factors Predicted to Influence Transformation of Government 31

2.10.1 Theories Supporting E-government and Technology ............................................. 31

vii

2.10.2 Theories Supporting Transparency and Accountability ......................................... 32

2.10.3 Theory supporting Citizen Expectations ................................................................. 33

2.11 Performance of Government and its Relationship with Transformation of

Government and Citizen Trust and Confidence ........................................................................ 33

2.12 Citizen Satisfaction and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and

Citizen Trust and Confidence ................................................................................................... 34

2.13 Theory Supporting Performance of Government and Citizen Satisfaction and their

Relationship with Citizens Trust and Confidence in Government ........................................... 35

2.14 Gap found in Literature .............................................................................................. 35

2.15 Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................... 36

Chapter 3 : Conceptual Model ...................................................................................................... 38

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 38

3.2 Relationship between e-government and transformation of government ...................... 38

3.3 Relationship between technology and transformation of government ........................... 39

3.4 Relationship between citizen expectations and transformation of government ............. 39

3.5 Relationship between transparency and transformation of government ........................ 40

3.6 Relationship between accountability and transformation of government ...................... 40

3.7 Relationship between transformation of government and performance ........................ 41

3.8 Relationship between performance of government and satisfaction .............................. 41

3.9 Relationship between satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in government ... 42

3.10 The proposed conceptual model and extracted theories ............................................. 44

3.11 Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................... 46

Chapter 4 : Research Methodology............................................................................................... 48

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 48

4.2 Research Philosophy ...................................................................................................... 49

4.3 Research Design ............................................................................................................. 50

4.3.1 Research Purpose .................................................................................................... 50

4.3.2 Unit of Analysis ...................................................................................................... 51

4.3.3 Research Data ......................................................................................................... 51

4.3.4 Choice of Research Design (Mode of Observation) ............................................... 52

4.3.5 Time Dimension...................................................................................................... 52

4.3.6 Stages of the Research Process ............................................................................... 52

4.4 Research Methodology ................................................................................................... 55

4.5 Quantitative Method ....................................................................................................... 56

4.5.1 Sampling Process .................................................................................................... 56

viii

4.5.2 Target Population .................................................................................................... 57

4.5.3 Sampling Frame ...................................................................................................... 57

4.5.4 Sampling Technique ............................................................................................... 57

4.5.5 Sample Size ............................................................................................................. 58

4.5.6 Data Collection Tool ............................................................................................... 59

4.5.7 Types of Questionnaires ......................................................................................... 59

4.6 Questionnaire Development and Validation .................................................................. 60

4.6.1 Overview ................................................................................................................. 60

4.6.2 Structure of the Questionnaire ................................................................................ 61

4.6.3 Pre-Test ................................................................................................................... 61

4.6.4 Pilot Survey ............................................................................................................. 62

4.6.5 Main Survey ............................................................................................................ 66

4.7 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................. 68

4.8 Research Ethics .............................................................................................................. 69

4.9 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................... 69

Chapter 5 : Data Analysis ............................................................................................................. 71

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 71

5.2 Response Rate and Sampling Size ................................................................................. 71

5.3 Respondent Profile ......................................................................................................... 72

5.4 Factor Analysis ............................................................................................................... 72

5.5 Reliability and Validity Analysis ................................................................................... 73

5.6 Descriptive Statistics ...................................................................................................... 74

5.7 Correlation Matrix .......................................................................................................... 76

5.8 Normality of the Data ..................................................................................................... 76

5.9 Structural Equation Modelling ....................................................................................... 77

5.10 Confirmatory Factor Analysis .................................................................................... 77

5.10.1 Measurement Model Fit.............................................................................................. 77

5.10.2 Standardized Loadings, Critical Ratios and R Squares .............................................. 79

5.10.3 Construct Validity Assessment ................................................................................... 82

5.11 Path Analysis .............................................................................................................. 83

5.12 Mediation Effect ......................................................................................................... 84

5.13 Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................... 86

Chapter 6 : Discussion .................................................................................................................. 89

6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 89

ix

6.2 Overview of the Research .............................................................................................. 89

6.3 Revisiting the Concept of Citizen’s Trust and Confidence in Government and

Transformation of Government ................................................................................................ 90

6.4 Instrument Validation ..................................................................................................... 93

6.5 Significance of the Empirical Findings .......................................................................... 93

6.5.1 Overview of the Findings........................................................................................ 93

6.5.2 Answers to the Research Questions ........................................................................ 94

6.5.3 Results of the Hypotheses Testing .......................................................................... 97

6.5.4 Mediation Effects of Performance of Government and Citizens’ Satisfaction ..... 105

6.5.5 Total Effects of All Relationships in the Conceptual Model ................................ 105

6.6 Thoughts on the Empirical Findings ............................................................................ 107

6.7 Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................... 107

Chapter 7 : Conclusion................................................................................................................ 110

7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 110

7.2 Research Overview ...................................................................................................... 110

7.3 Theoretical Contributions ............................................................................................. 113

7.4 Policy and Practice Implications .................................................................................. 117

7.5 Research Limitations .................................................................................................... 120

7.6 Future Research ............................................................................................................ 122

7.7 Revisiting the Aim and Objectives of the Research ..................................................... 123

7.8 Personal Experience and Lessons Learned from the Ph.D Journey ............................. 125

7.9 Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................... 127

References ................................................................................................................................... 129

Appendix 1 – Research Instruments (Pilot Survey) .................................................................... 151

Appendix 2 – Research Instruments (Main Survey) ................................................................... 152

Appendix 3 – Research Instruments (following deletion of Q7) ................................................ 153

Appendix 4 – Research Instruments (after data analysis) ........................................................... 154

Appendix 5 – Research Ethics Approval .................................................................................... 155

x

List of Tables

Table 2.1 GCC Ranking Globally ................................................................................................. 18

Table 2.2 Factors Affecting Public Trust in Government ............................................................. 20

Table 2.3 Relationship between Confidence and Trust ................................................................ 22

Table 2.4 Theories Supporting Factors Predicted to work with Transformation of Government 31

Table 3.1 Theoretical Background for the drawn Relationships .................................................. 45

Table 4.1 Comparison between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methodologies.............. 55

Table 4.2 Questionnaire Development Phases.............................................................................. 60

Table 4.3 Research Questions and Evidence from the Literature ................................................. 62

Table 4.4 Summary of reliability and validity analyses (before deleting questions).................... 64

Table 4.5 Summary of reliability and validity analyses (after deleting Q14, Q17, Q29 and Q33)

............................................................................................................................................... 65

Table 4.6 Main Survey - Research Questions ............................................................................... 66

Table 4.7 Summary of the reliability and validity analysis for EGOV (following deleting Q7) . 67

Table 5.1 Profile of the Respondents ............................................................................................ 72

Table 5.2 Values for Reliability and Validity Assessment ........................................................... 73

Table 5.3 Reliability and Validity Assessment ............................................................................. 74

Table 5.4 Descriptive Statistics ..................................................................................................... 74

Table 5.5 Mean, Std. Deviation and Correlation .......................................................................... 76

Table 5.6 Parameters for skewness and kurtosis .......................................................................... 76

Table 5.7 Results of skewness and kurtosis test ........................................................................... 77

Table 5.8 Recommended Levels for Fit Indices ........................................................................... 78

Table 5.9 Values for Fit Indices .................................................................................................... 78

Table 5.10 Recommended Values for Standardized loadings, C.R, SMC ................................... 79

Table 5.11 Values for Standardized loadings, C.R, SMC ............................................................ 79

Table 5.12 Recommended Values for AVE and CR .................................................................... 82

Table 5.13 AVE and CR Values of the Measurement Model ....................................................... 82

Table 5.14 Path Analysis Results.................................................................................................. 83

Table 5.15 Standardized Regression Weights .............................................................................. 84

Table 6.1Money spent on e-government projects ......................................................................... 90

xi

Table 6.2 Failing e-government projects ...................................................................................... 91

Table 6.3 Path Analysis Results.................................................................................................... 94

Table 7.1 Meeting the Aim and Objectives of the Research ...................................................... 124

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Confidence in Government.......................................................................................... 15

Figure 3.1 Proposed Conceptual Model........................................................................................ 44

Figure 4.1 Stages of the Research Process.................................................................................... 54

Figure 4.2 Types of Sampling Techniques ................................................................................... 58

Figure 4.3 Types of Questionnaires .............................................................................................. 59

Figure 5.1 Measurement Model .................................................................................................... 81

Figure 5.2 Path Analysis Results .................................................................................................. 83

Figure 5.3 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Transformation .................................... 85

Figure 5.4 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Performance ......................................... 85

Figure 5.5 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Satisfaction .......................................... 86

Figure 5.6 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Trust and Confidence .......................... 86

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Chapter 1: Introduction

Mohamed Mahmood 1 | P a g e

Chapter 1 : Introduction

1.1 Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of the research covering the rationale and motivations for

conducting it, identifies the gap, research questions, aim and objectives as well as the reasons for

selecting the Kingdom of Bahrain for conducting the empirical work for the research. This research

contributes to the growing body of knowledge and offers a number of implications for policy

makers and practitioners. A quantitative research methodology is employed for the research along

with adopting an online survey that was distributed randomly to citizens living in Bahrain.

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was chosen as a multivariate technique and Confirmatory

Factor Analysis (CFA) and path analysis were performed on the empirical data that was collected.

This chapter is structured as follows. Sections 1.2 and 1.3 provide a background of the research

and presents the research problem and gap. This is followed by the research aim and objectives in

section 1.4. In Section 1.5, the significance of the research is described. Then, in section 1.6, the

employed research methodology selected for this research is highlighted. The thesis structure is

presented in section 1.7 and finally, section 1.8, summarizes the overall chapter.

1.2 Research Background

An enormous amount of money has been spent worldwide on electronic or digital government

initiatives. For example, the cost of e-government as of 2014 in the United States was 36.65 billion

dollars since 1992, in South Korea it was 1.6 billion dollars since 2003 and it was 0.18 billion

dollars in Russia since 2002 (Mukhoryanova et al., 2016). When comparing these figures to the

early 2000’s, e-government spending in the UK for the year 2001 was US $520 million (Harvard

Policy Group, 2001), while it was US $189 million in India (Basu, 2004). As per the digital

governance project database released by the World Bank in January 2017, 1,129 investment-

lending projects were funded by the World Bank in 135 countries around the globe since 1995

with a total amount of US $ 292,677 million.



The main purpose behind this global spending was to improve performance of governments, save

costs and improve citizens’ trust in their governments through digital transformation. However,

despite this tremendous spending on digital government initiatives, the literature shows that

citizens’ trust and confidence in government is still in decline and further e-participation in digital

services is still considered as a main challenge as highlighted by the United Nations E-Government

Survey Reports released in 2012, 2014 and 2016. This leads to the fact that e-government did not

work as planned and meet expected outcomes (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Gunawong and Gao,

2017; Kim et al., 2009; Miyata, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011; Rodríguez Bolívar et al., 2016;

Weerakkody et al., 2009; Welch et al., 2005). The increasing number of failed projects further

confirms that e-government has failed to influence public engagement and increase citizens’ trust

in their governments. For instance, in the UK the government wasted several billion pounds on

projects that were cancelled or failed to achieve stated objectives. Examples include the C-Nomis

project (The Economist, Feb 2008), the e-borders system (£224 million), BBC digital video

archive system (£100 million), Ministry of Justice back-office project (£56 million), NHS’s

National programme for IT (£10 billon) (The Guardian, 19 August 2014), Universal Credit (£425

million) (NewStatesman, 14 April 2014) and Common Agricultural Policy Delivery Programme

(£642 million since 2005) (House of Commons, Feb 2017).

As a consequence of these failing digitally influenced government projects - for which a lot of

money have been spent, public trust and confidence in governments in most countries has

continued to decline during the last decade (Bean, 2015; Edwards, 2015; Morgeson et al., 2011;

Teo et al., 2008; World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017). Yet, there is

also evidence to show that there are some countries in the world where people still continue to

have trust and confidence in their government, for instance, countries in south Asia and Sub-

Saharan Africa (World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015). The reasons for such levels

of trust are not clearly outlined by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in its report;

however, from the themes of the report and the flow of sections, they can be related to social unrest,

social conditions, rising inequalities, employment dynamics, income inequality and economic

growth (World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015). Despite such isolated instances of

certain countries where citizens seem to have trust and confidence in their governments, there is a

broad consensus among researchers about the growing trust deficit and decline in confidence of

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/18/uk-bill-eborders-contract-termination-raytheon








people in their governments in general (Bovens and Wille, 2008; Job, 2005; Nye, 1997; Scharpf,

1999), reasons for which seem to be unclear. Studies have shown that this decline in citizens’ trust

in their government has contributed to lack of citizens’ engagement and use of e-government

systems that have been implemented as part of the transformative agenda in many countries

(Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and Mossberger,

2006; West, 2004). Yet, few studies have investigated the factors that contribute to this decline in

trust and the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence

in government.

1.3 Research Problem and Gap

Although literature shows that, some work has been done to understand the decline in trust and

confidence in their government; this work has largely focused on technical, service quality,

usability and adoption aspects of ICT enabled transformation projects in government with limited

impact on practice. For instance, e-government was viewed as a solution to improve performance,

transform governments, reduce costs and reverse this decline (Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al.,

2008; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006). Yet, as outlined earlier, heavy investments in e-government

and associated digital transformation projects have failed to meet the expected results. According

to the United National Surveys 2012, 2014 and 2016, the levels of citizens’ participation and

adoption of digital government services is considered as one of the main challenges around the

globe. As outlined by the UN and other normative studies, of the many projects that have been

implemented around the world, very few have achieved real transformation of government (i.e.

fundamental changes to the way core functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable

gains in performance and efficiency) (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Gunawong and Gao, 2017;

Kim et al., 2009; Miyata, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011; Omar et al., 2017; Rodríguez Bolívar et al.,

2016; Weerakkody et al., 2009; Welch et al., 2005).

The decline in public trust in government as well as the failing e-government projects has attracted

the attention of a number of researchers due to the important role it plays in understanding citizens’

behaviours towards their governments. For instance, some literature has tended to investigate

certain components of citizens’ experiences in e-government in isolation, which does not take into

account the inherent complexities as well as the possible influence of many potential relationships



amongst the factors that contribute to citizens’ experiences (Morgeson et al., 2011). Similarly, it

is found in the literature that there is a lack of agreement on a common set of factors that contribute

to the decline in trust and confidence of people in their governments (Bannister and Connolly,

2011; West, 2004). Some of the factors which have been identified in the literature that influence

citizens’ trust and confidence are: technology (Morgeson et al., 2011; Tolbert and Mossberger,

2006), transparency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009), accountability (Bannister

and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009), citizens’ expectations (Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011;

Morgeson et al., 2011), government performance (Bouckaert et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011;

Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de Walle et al., 2008), citizens’ satisfaction (Bouckaert

et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de

Walle et al., 2008) and transformation of government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and

Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005). Noticeably, many of the identified factors in the literature

are discussed in conjunction with transformation of government (Al-Shboul et al., 2014;

Mahmood, 2016; Siddique, 2016). Yet, several studies have confirmed that there is a need to

examine new determinants of government performance and citizen satisfaction, which have not

been considered in the literature yet - for instance determinants of e-participation and satisfaction

of citizens’ in e-participation (Alharbi et al., 2016; Morgeson, 2013; Reddick and Anthopoulos,

2014). This argument could be extended to government transformation as a determinant of

government performance and citizen satisfaction.

The term “transformation of government” is a complex one and it is hard to find a common

definition for it in the literature. Accordingly, it should be dealt with carefully in any research. The

literature shows that transformation of government has the potential to reverse the decline in

citizens’ trust and confidence in government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and

Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005). However, as outlined before, many of the e-government

projects that were claimed to transform government failed and no real transformation of

government did take place as the focus was only on technical solutions and provisioning of

government services through digital means (Alsaeed et al., 2014; Anthopoulos et al., 2016;

Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Choi et al., 2016; Das Aundhe et al., 2016; Gunawong and Gao,

2017; Omar et al., 2017; Sehli et al., 2016; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016). As such, there is a

need to understand thoroughly how transformation of government as a construct affects trust and



confidence in government in the presence of factors such as government performance and citizen

satisfaction. Knowledge about this relationship between transformation of government,

government performance, citizen satisfaction and trust and confidence in government could

provide some way forward to arrest the decline in citizens’ trust in government. For the purpose

of this research, Transformation of Government is defined as fundamental changes to the way core

functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency.

As for factors influencing transformation of government, expectations on the ability of e-

government to transform governments has motivated citizens and showed promise in reversing the

trend of declining trust in governments. Notwithstanding, alongside e-government there are other

factors such as technology adopted by the government organizations, citizens’ expectations,

transparency and accountability that need to be considered as well as to know their influence on

the transformation of government which could lead to the reversal of declining trust in

governments.

From reviewing the literature, it is clear that there is a need to further investigate the decline in

trust and confidence of people in their governments. Moreover, there is a lack of studies that

investigate the relationship and influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. This research posits that this is the main gap in the literature that needs

to be bridged. To do so, it is important to define the factors influencing transformation of

government and the influence of each on transformation. This argument provided the rationale and

motivations for conducting this research.

Like in Western Europe, many other regions of the world, including countries in the Middle East,

North Africa, East Asia and Latin America have witnessed failed e-government efforts and

investments towards digital enable transformation efforts in government (World Employment and

Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017). The GCC region, part of the Middle East region, have

an advanced e-government platform and systems that have been recognised by the United Nations

as shown in their E-Government Survey Reports released in 2012, 2014 and 2016. This

advancement could not have been achieved by the GCC countries without investing heavily and

commitment from the leaders towards achieving an impactful transformation in their governments’

efforts to deliver improved services. Yet, in line with the rest of the world, electronic participation



in GCC countries is considered as a main challenge (United Nations E-Government Survey

Reports, 2012; 2014; 2016). Moreover, the World Employment and Social Outlook Trends (2015;

2016; 2017) illustrate that Middle East countries faced a tremendous decline in citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. Some scholars such as Al-Shafi and Weerakkody (2008) and AlSobhi

et al. (2010) have highlighted that electronic participation in GCC countries is a major challenge.

They posit that citizens’ trust and confidence in their government may play a key role in this

phenomenon. Such decline is alarming for the GCC region and it is hard to find a comprehensive

study conducted in any of the GCC countries that investigated the decline of citizens’ trust and

confidence in government and the role that transformation of government may play in tackling this

decline.

This lack of evidence motivated this study and offered the right setting to conduct research making

the geographic context interesting and new to explore. In this respect, Bahrain as part of the GCC

countries, has been selected for conducting the research. The size of Bahrain (i.e. being the smallest

country in the GCC region), level of e-government development (i.e. being the most advanced

country in e-government development and implementation as per the United National Surveys

2012, 2014 and 2016), commitment from its government for e-government systems (i.e. around

$106 million, has been allocated for digital government initiatives in Bahrain since the inception

of the e-government initiative in 2007), and the challenges faced by Bahrain in the area of e-

participation (United Nations E-Government Survey, 2014; 2016) offer further justification for the

study. These justifications place the GCC in general and Bahrain in particular as an attractive

country for conducting this study. The findings of this research is also relevant for the rest of the

GCC countries since all are advanced and mature in the implementation of the e-government and

share the same culture. Countries who have just started or are in the process of commencing

projects related to digital enabled transformation of governments can benefit in particular from the

outcomes of this research.

Keeping the above aspects in view, this research aims to answer three research questions: (1) what

factors influence transformation of government, (2) how these factors influence transformation,

and (3) how transformation of government can be related to trust and confidence in citizens. The



answers to these research questions are expected to enable the researcher to achieve the following

aim and objectives.

1.4 Research Aim and Objectives

The aim of this research is to investigate how digital transformation of government influences

citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

The above aim is achieved by pursuing the following objectives:

1. Examining the current literature on factors influencing transformation of government

and analysing the relationship that exists between those factors and ‘transformation of

government’.

2. In a similar vein, studying the extant literature and reviewing the theories and models

that could be used to understand the concepts of transformation of government and

citizens’ trust and confidence, as well as examining the relationship between the two

concepts through proposing a conceptual model and hypotheses.

3. Defining the methodological framework for conducting empirical research to test the

proposed hypotheses

4. Analysing the empirical findings and highlighting the key relationships between the

different constructs proposed in the conceptual model

5. Discussing the key findings in relation to the literature, outlining the main theoretical

and practical implications of the study and offering suggestions for future research

1.5 Significance of the Research

This research and its outcomes synthesise and enrich the information system literature and in

particular the areas of transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. The main contribution of the research is that this research is considered as a novel

contribution to the body of knowledge due to the fact that it is the first of its type, as per the

researches’ knowledge, that investigated from citizens’ perspective the relationship between

transformation and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Outcomes of this research will

help in advancing the understanding of how transformation of government - through fundamental



changes to the core functions and processes of government - can influence citizens’ perception of

government and their engagement with government.

Additionally, findings of the research show that e-government and technology are not enough for

achieving a successful transformation of government and thus reversing the decline in citizens’

trust and confidence in government. Other factors should be considered in this equation, which are

adoption of transparency by the government in all of its functions and activities, practicing

accountability and meeting citizens’ expectations and demands.

The developed conceptual model is considered a novel contribution of this research. Thus, it may

be used as a frame of reference for both the policy makers and researchers for better understanding

the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government as well as the role of transformation in

reversing this decline. In addition to the theoretical contributions, the research outlines some

implications for policy makers. For instance, it provides insights into the critical factors

influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in government and the effect of transformation of

government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government. By recognising these factors, any

new efforts that are focused on transforming government functions have the opportunity to take

into account their influence when implementing such change. For the research community, the

conceptual model proposed in the study deviates from the norm of using technology or user centric

theories, to propose a novel model based on the core concepts of e-government, which include,

transformation of government, performance improvement, transparency and accountability. This

is significant as researchers have for nearly two decades continued to view e-government with a

techno-centric view and repeatedly used theories and models that are derived from private sector

contexts, which have had limited effect on practice. By focusing on the core concepts of e-

government and how they relate to and can be influenced by fundamental changes to the structure

and the way government functions (through ICT enabled transformation of government), this

research advances the current knowledge that has been recycled and thus been stagnant for several

decades.



1.6 Research Methodology

A quantitative research methodology has been adopted based on a number of reasons as explained

hereafter. This research investigates from citizens’ perspectives the influence of transformation of

government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government, which is a phenomenon that is

discussed in this research through testing current theory, validating the developed conceptual

model and proposed hypotheses. As such, positivism is the adopted research philosophy within

which citizens’ perception are gathered to validate the proposed research model and associated

constructs and hypotheses. Since the target audiences of this research are ordinary citizens of the

Kingdom of Bahrain, a quantitative methodology is suitable to capture a large portion of the

general citizens’ perception on the proposed hypotheses. The use of a quantitative methodology

in this research is in line with similar studies conducted previously in IS research (e.g. Morgeson

et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006).

Within the quantitative frame, an online survey was developed and distributed randomly through

different means such as email, SMS and social media applications to ordinary citizens living in the

Kingdom of Bahrain for the purposes of capturing the views of a large number of ordinary citizens

from different places in the Kingdom of Bahrain as well as variety of backgrounds. Following the

data collection, SEM was chosen as a multivariate technique for this research to validate the fitness

of the conceptual model and test the hypotheses through performing CFA and path analysis.

1.7 Research Outline

The structure of this Ph.D. thesis followed the methodology of Phillips and Pugh (2010) which

includes four phases being a) background theory, b) focal theory, c) data theory, and d) novel

contribution. The background theory is about the area of the problem along with the supported

literature (Chapter 2). Focal theory deals with the development of the conceptual model (Chapter

3). On the other hand, data theory is related with issues such as research approach, methodology

and protocol (Chapter 4). The next one is the data theory that is about the process of data collection

and analysis (Chapter 5). Finally, the novel contribution is about the findings of the research

(Chapters 6 and 7). The below sections provide a summary of the seven chapters of this thesis.




This chapter presents an overview of the research and identifies the research gap, questions, aim

and objectives. The chapter covers the rationale and motivations for conducting this research,

significance of the research, research methodology and finally research outline.

Chapter 2: Literature Review – Background Theory

The literature review is covered in chapter 2, which is about identification of key factors

influencing transformation of government and trust and confidence in government along with

supporting theories for each. Furthermore, the chapter presents and discusses different theories

and models that are supporting the concepts covered in this research as well as the potential

relationships between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government.

Chapter 3: Conceptual Model – Focal Theory

This chapter presents and explains the developed conceptual model as well as its foundations

taking into account the factors identified during the literature phase. Further, theories that support

the defined constructs and proposed hypotheses within the conceptual model are discussed.

Chapter 4: Research Methodology – Data Theory

This chapter provides an overview of the suitable methodology and the related research techniques

adopted for this research. It starts with justifying the reasons for selecting positivist as a research

philosophy compared to interpretive and critical research. Then, it moves to the research purpose

where justifications are outlined for the selection of explanatory as a research purpose. Stages of

the research process is illustrated which contains six phases.

Chapter 5: Findings – Data Theory

Chapter 5 presents the data analysis including different tests performed and findings of the CFA

and path analysis. The roles of mediators in the conceptual model are clarified as well as the direct

and indirect effects of all paths. SEM is chosen as a multivariate technique for this research to



validate the fitness of the conceptual model and test the hypotheses. Before performing CFA and

path analysis, a number of tests were conducted to prepare a clean data for the SEM, which

included exploratory factor analysis, reliability and validity of the research instrument, correlation

and normality of the data distribution.

Chapter 6: Discussion – Novel Contribution

Chapter 6 discusses the findings of the data analysis as well as maps the findings to the gap

identified and the three questions agreed for this research. In this chapter, answers to the three

research questions and results of the eight hypotheses are thoroughly discussed, justified,

explained and linked to practical outcomes. The findings of this research illustrate that

transformation of government has a significant positive effect on citizens’ trust and confidence in

their government. It is interesting to find out that e-government and technology are not sufficient

for achieving a true transformed government and as such three other factors should be considered,

which are, citizens’ expectations, adoption of transparency and activating accountability.

Chapter 7: Conclusions – Novel Contribution

This chapter identifies a number of research contributions as well as practical implications to

policy makers and practitioners. The research limitations and suggestions for future research are

presented and discussed. Finally, the aim and objectives of the research are revisited.

As far as the researcher’s knowledge, this research is first of its type that investigates from citizens’

perspective the relationship between ‘transformation’ and ‘citizens’ trust and confidence in

government’. Therefore, this research is considered as a novel contribution to the body of

knowledge.

1.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter provided an overview of the research including the rationale and motivations for

commencing the research, presented several key literatures to support the research gap, presented

research questions and reasons for selecting Bahrain for conducting this research and outlined the

aim and objectives of the study. The key gap found in the literature is the lack of knowledge on

how transformation of government is influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in government.



Therefore, this research aims to investigate the relationship between transformation of government

and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. The research posits that, if this relationship is

understood, the declining citizens’ trust and confidence in government can be tackled through

focused efforts to transform government with performance, transparency and accountability in

mind.

This research and its outcomes synthesise and enrich the IS literature and in particular the areas of

digital government, transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. A number of theoretical and practical contributions were illustrated, which will be

expanded in the remaining chapters.

Chapter 2: Literature Review


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW



Chapter 2 : Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

Chapter 1 provides an overview of this research, in terms of identifying the rationale, research

motivations, and gaps in the literature, whilst also listing the research questions, aim and

objectives. In brief, there has been a decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government over

the last few decades, and some work has been done to understand this decline in e-government

initiatives and projects. Despite spending a lot of money, many e-government initiatives and

projects did not meet the expectations and failed. This was because they largely focused on

technical, service quality, usability and adoption aspects of ICT-enabled transformation projects

in the government, which had limited impact on practice. There exists a gap in the existing

research, which calls for attaining deeper insights into the decline of citizens’ trust and confidence

in government, and the influence of digital transformation of the government on it. In this chapter,

a comprehensive review of the normative literature on citizens’ trust and confidence in

government, transformation of government, e-government and related factors, is conducted to

delineate the key issues and themes discussed in the literature relating to this study.

Literature shows that most countries are facing a challenge in the area of public trust and

confidence in governments (Edwards, 2015; World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015;

2016; 2017). A key study by the OECD confirms that public trust and confidence in governments

has continued to decline over the last few decades in OECD countries (Edwards, 2015). Other

studies show that a similar phenomenon could be witnessed in many other regions of the world,

including countries in the Middle East, North Africa, East Asia and Latin America (World

Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017). For example, figure 2.1 shows the

results of a survey conducted by ILO with regard to the extent of confidence people have in their

national governments across several countries. Although this ILO study was released in 2015,

figure 2.1 is representing results for 2012/13. The other ILO reports that were released in 2016 and

2017 did not include such figures.



Figure 2.1 Confidence in Government.

Source: Adopted from World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015

As can be seen from figure 2.1, some countries in south Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa have been

successful in maintaining people’s trust and confidence in their governments. Despite isolated

instances of certain countries where citizens continue to trust their governments, there is a broad

consensus amongst researchers about the growing trust deficit and decline in people’s confidence

in governments (Bovens and Wille, 2008; Job, 2005; Nye, 1997; Scharpf, 1999). The reasons for

this remain unclear, and the issue is being widely investigated in anticipation of solutions that can

arrest such a decline.

Although literature shows some investigations (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Hong, 2013;

Morgeson et al., 2011; Myeong et al.,2014; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Welch

et al., 2005; West, 2004) have been carried out to understand the decline in trust and confidence

in governments, more investigation is to be conducted to gain a deeper insight into this

phenomenon. Outcomes from the current efforts are not generalizable, and in many instances are

highly focused on a particular context. For instance, some studies investigate certain components

of citizen experience in e-government in isolation, which does not take into account the inherent

complexities and the possible influence of many potential relationships amongst factors that



contribute to citizen experience (Morgeson et al., 2011). In addition, there is a lack of agreement

on a common set of factors that contribute to the decline in trust and confidence of people in their

governments. For instance, one factor that has been identified as a cause is the diminished

performance of governments (Bean, 2015; Bouckaert et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011;

Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Orren, 1997; Peters, 1999; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van

de Walle et al., 2008), whereas another factor identified as a cause of this decline is the rising

inequality amongst the population (World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016;

2017). Other factors mentioned in the literature are pointed out in Table 2.2 of this chapter.

Morgeson et al. (2011) argues that many studies have not produced conclusive evidence on how

to handle the decline in trust and confidence in governments. There essentially is a need for further

investigation into this phenomenon. Therefore, the next sections will present an extensive review

of the literature on the twin concept of trust and confidence, alongside e-government, technology,

transparency, accountability, citizen expectations and transformation of government, government

performance and citizen satisfaction. Based on this review, chapter 2 will identify a clear gap that

needs to be addressed to fulfil the aforementioned problem.

Middle Eastern countries are facing a rapid decline in citizen trust (-11%), which is alarming for

GCC countries, overall (Figure 2.1). The present research will be carried out in the Kingdom of

Bahrain to expand on the situation in this region. This chapter is structured as follows. Section 2.2

is about the research context and justifies the choice of Bahrain for conducting this research.

Section 2.3 discusses citizens’ trust and confidence in government, alongside identification of the

relationship between confidence and trust with applicable theories. Transformation of government

and a theory supporting it is covered in section 2.4. As for section 2.5, it discusses e-government

and its relationship with citizens’ trust and confidence in government and transformation of

government. Similarly, sections 2.6, 2.7, 2.8 and 2.9 discuss technology, citizen expectations,

transparency, accountability, and their relationships with citizens’ trust and confidence in

government and transformation of government. Section 2.10 presents theories supporting the

factors, which are expected to influence transformation of government. Performance of

government and its relationship with citizens’ trust and confidence in government and

transformation of government is covered in section 2.11. Section 2.12 discusses satisfaction and

its relationship with citizens’ trust and confidence in government and transformation of



government. The theory supporting performance of government and citizens’ satisfaction and

their relationships with citizens’ trust and confidence in government is highlighted in section 2.13.

Section 2.14 presents the gaps found in literature, with the key conclusions outlined in section

2.15.

2.2 Research Context: Status of E- Government in Bahrain

Recently, e-governments in the Gulf Cooperation Countries (GCC) have achieved much in terms

of deployment and implementation. Over the past few years, the governments in such countries

have enhanced their services by transforming them to digital services, and making them available

for citizens through e-government portals, mobile portals, e-kiosks, e-services centres and national

contact centres (Al-Khouri, 2012). Bahrain, in particular, has witnessed e-government

transformation with various services being made available for the citizens.

Many researchers have investigated e-government in GCC countries, including Bahrain from a

number of perspectives; majority of these studies have covered factors influencing adoption and

diffusion of e-government services (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010; Salmi and Hasnan, 2016;

Weerakkody et al., 2013). For instance, trust was identified as a key factor for the adoption of e-

government services (Al-Khouri, 2012; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010; Osman et al., 2011).

Additionally, culture and social influences were considered important factors by many researchers

(Albusaidy and Weerakkody, 2008; Al-Sobhi et al., 2010; Carter and Weerakkody, 2008; Khalil,

2011; Shafi and Weerakkody, 2009). Rodrigues et al. (2016) suggest that confidentiality, trust, and

attitude towards technology use are major factors for e-government adoption in the UAE. For

Saudi Arabia, confidentiality, privacy, and security are identified as important factors to be

considered by the government for run successful e-government services (Yamin and Mattar, 2016).

In addition to these factors, responsiveness, efficiency and reliability were considered critical for

determining the quality of e-governments (Sharma et al., 2015). As indicated, a high percentage

of the available studies focused on factors influencing adoption of e-government services, in

general. Moreover, no study conducted in the GCC countries has investigated trust as a dependent

factor, or explored the impact of transformation of governments on citizens’ trust and confidence

in those governments. Thus, this research is motivated to focus on transformation of government,



and to investigate whether such transformation influences citizens’ trust and confidence in the

government.

As per the international community and specifically, the E-Government Development Index

(EGDI) of the United Nations (UN), efforts of GCC countries towards e-government have been

recognized (United Nations E-Government Survey, 2012; 2014; 2016). The EGDI is an established

Index that consists of three sub-indicators: Global Government Index, Online Service Index and

E-Participation Index (United Nations E-Government Survey, 2012; 2014; 2016). To measure the

status of these three sub-indicators, the UN conducts a survey every two years. The recent survey

results were published in the year 2016, (Table 2.1). The table below is indicative of EGDI

rankings for the GCC countries. It is clear that the numbers have experienced considerable

fluctuation since 2005, which indicates a lack of sustainability in the e-government services.

Furthermore, the results indicate a need for further investigation of this issue.

Table 2.1 GCC Ranking Globally

Adopted from: United Nations E-Government Surveys E-Government Development Index (EGDI) Ranking

2005 2012 2014 2016

Bahrain 53 36 18 24

KSA 80 41 36 44

Qatar 62 48 44 48

UAE 42 28 32 29

Oman 112 64 48 66

Kuwait 75 63 49 40

The UN Surveys of 2014 and 2016 showed that the electronic participation levels were not as

expected in both developed and developing countries. The electronic participation levels in GCC

countries represent key challenges that may be related to citizens’ trust in their governments (Al-

Shafi and Weerakkody, 2008; AlSobhi et al., 2010). These factors make the developing countries

an interesting area to investigate, compared to the developed countries. Therefore, this area will

be considered for investigation in this research, with particular attention focused on Bahrain.

According to Mahmood and Weerakkody (2014), Bahrain as a developing country has been

committed to various ICT initiatives to provide a higher level of services to the public. This

commitment has resulted in taking digital services to an advanced stage of e-government

implementation. However, as mentioned, the governments are still facing challenges with the level

of citizen engagement in government services.



E-government initiatives in Bahrain have resulted in a transformed government, improved

interaction and engagement with government, better quality of services, cost savings, socio-

economic benefits and satisfied citizens (Mahmood and Weerakkody, 2014; United Nations E-

Government Survey, 2014). In summary, over 300 e-government services are provided to citizens

through different means as pointed out above (iGA, June 2016). With respect to the e-government

portal, there were 782,221 visits in total, with the services being used by 468,892 people, and

59,658 transactions being made. A total of BD 3,355,021 was collected in 2016 (iGA, June 2016).

As for mobile services, 754,201 people used them, 4,379 transactions were made, and BD 231,306

was collected. The kiosk devices were used by 4,761 people, 744 transactions were made and BD

6,871 was collected (iGA, June 2016). These statistics show that despite being the smallest of all

GCC countries, e-government in Bahrain is the most advanced in the region, which is also

confirmed by the UN Surveys. These advancements would not be accomplished without the full

support from the government. Around $106 million has been allocated for digital government

initiatives in Bahrain, since the inception of the e-government initiative in 2007 (iGA, 2017).

However, like with other GCC countries, e-participation remains a key challenge for Bahrain

(United Nations E-Government Survey, 2014; 2016), and it is to do with citizens’ trust and

confidence in the government (Mahmood and Weerakkody, 2014).

Literature lacks studies conducted in Bahrain for investigating the relationship between

transformation of government and citizens’ trust in the government. This makes Bahrain a good

choice for investigating the influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and

confidence in the government. It will also help in identifying the key factors that contribute to the

successful transformation of a government. The following section will provide an overview of trust

and confidence in government, and its relationship with other factors from the existing literature,

which will form the basis of this research.

2.3 Trust and Confidence in Government

The concept of trust is described as unclear, deceptive, abstract, shared, multifaceted,

multidisciplinary and complex (Edwards, 2015). Some argue that the meaning of trust and its

content can be different in different nations and cultural backgrounds (Edwards, 2015). It also

argued that the meaning of trust could change over time (Edwards, 2015). For this research, trust



in general indicates public trust. According to the World Bank (2010), trust has many definitions.

Broadly, it is used to denote citizens’ assessment of a government’s privilege to execute its

decisions, laws and regulations, alongside the probability that the government will ensure the

delivery of its commitments to its people (World Bank, 2010). While many definitions of public

trust exist in the literature (Edwards, 2015), it can be broadly interpreted as citizens’ attitude

towards the government and its employees. The key question for this research revolves around the

decline of public trust in government and its employees, a phenomenon that is raising concerns for

the governments, its employees, and the researchers (Carter and Belanger, 2005; Meijer et al.,

2012; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004).

This topic has attracted the attention of many researchers and is currently a serious topic of

discussion in many nations, due to the important role it plays in understanding citizen behavior

towards the government. Literature shows that a number of questions pertaining to trust are still

an area of concern for the researchers (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Mahmood and Weerakkody,

2014; Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011). For instance, researchers continue to

investigate why trust changes over time, what factors contribute to the decline in trust, and what

factors drive change in trust in the government (Wolak and Palus, 2010). While investigations

continue, it is clear that there is no unique set of factors that affect public trust in government.

Some of the factors that have been identified in the literature are listed in table 2.2 below.

Table 2.2 Factors Affecting Public Trust in Government

# Factors References 1 E-Government Morgeson et al. (2011); Tolbert and Mossberger (2006)

2 Technology Morgeson et al. (2011); Tolbert and Mossberger (2006)

3 Accountability Bannister and Connolly (2011); Kim et al. (2009)

4 Transparency Bannister and Connolly (2011); Kim et al. (2009)

5 Expectation Morgeson and Petrescu (2011); Morgeson et al. (2011)

6 Transformation of

government

Bannister and Connolly (2011); Kim et al. (2009);

Morgeson and Petrescu (2011)

7 Performance Bouckaert et al. (2005); Morgeson and Petrescu (2011);

Morgeson et al. (2011); Van de Walle and Bouckaert

(2003); Van de Walle et al. (2008)

8 Satisfaction Bouckaert et al. (2005); Morgeson and Petrescu (2011);

Morgeson et al. (2011); Teo et al. (2008); Van de Walle and

Bouckaert (2003); Van de Walle et al. (2008)

However, most of the factors identified in the extant literature need greater understanding in terms

of how they influence public trust in governments. For instance, some researchers argue that

citizen satisfaction is a major factor that affects public trust in government (Morgeson et al., 2011;



Teo et al., 2008). Some others argue that transformation is another factor that affects citizen trust

(Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009). Competence, benevolence and honesty are

amongst the other identified factors determining citizen trust in governments (Grimmelikhuijsen,

2009). However, one important factor that seems to be repeated by researchers in determining

public trust in government is the concept of e-government. Many argue that e-government has a

direct bearing on the trust level of citizens in their governments (Grimmelikhuijsen, 2009;

Morgeson et al., 2011; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), while some others argue that e-government

indirectly influences public trust (Abu-Shanab and Al-Azzam, 2012; Bélanger and Carter, 2008;

Carter and Bélanger, 2005; Colesca, 2009; Navarrete, 2010; Teo et al., 2008). E-government’s

potential to transform governments is motivating for the citizens, and showing promise in

reversing the trend of their declining trust in governments. There are other factors to be considered

(see Table 2.2), so their influence on the transformation of government can be studied to reverse

the declining trust in governments. The other important factor found to affect people of a nation is

their confidence in their governments. There appears to be a close relationship between trust and

confidence. A review of the concept of confidence was considered necessary to establish the

relationship between trust and confidence.

2.3.1 Relationship between Confidence and Trust

The concept of public confidence is considered an important feature that affects governance.

Public confidence is considered critical whilst measuring the quality of governance and the extent

of trust that the citizens have on governments (Mungiu-Pippidi, 2016). Confidence of citizens is

widely related to the level of corruption in countries, with literature hinting that higher the

confidence of citizens in governance, lower is the corruption level and vice-versa (Mungiu-Pippidi,

2016). Thus, public confidence becomes an important concept that needs to be considered while

discussing transformation of governments.

Prior research shows that confidence is a concept that is closely related to public trust (e.g. Mungiu-

Pippidi, 2016; Wolak and Palus, 2010). For instance, a study by Mungiu-Pippidi (2016) shows that

between 2008 and 2015, Europe has witnessed a fall in trust in governance due to the loss of

citizens’ confidence to some extent. Similar arguments are found in the American context; in their



study on public confidence in the U.S. State and local governments, Wolak and Palus (2010)

brought out a number of arguments posited by other authors, which indicated that trust is

influenced by confidence (e.g. Uslaner, 2001). However, questions are raised on whether the

dynamics of changing confidence levels can be related to the decline in citizen trust (Wolak and

Palus, 2010). Literature shows that a number of authors have argued that trust and confidence are

inseparable concepts (see Table 2.3).

Table 2.3 Relationship between Confidence and Trust

No. Relationship between confidence and trust Authors 1 Trust reflects the degree of confidence and goodwill directed toward

governing institutions.

Lai et al. (2010)

2 Trust is the information governing institutions share with

stakeholders.

Gilmour et al. (2015)

3 Governance is a means to build confidence and trust. Khan (2016)

4 Consequence of governance failures could result in loss of confidence

and trust.

Hess and Hess (2016)

5 Trust and confidence have often been viewed as crucial elements in

evaluating the performance.

Fukuyama (1995); Sargeant and Lee (2002);

Toppe and Kirsh (2002)

6 Social trust refers to citizens’ confidence in each

other as members of a community.

Edwards (2015)

In addition to its relationship to trust, confidence is explained as a challenge for transformation of

government. For instance, Al-Shboul et al. (2014) investigated the implementation of e-

government in Jordan, and found that public confidence and trust act as barriers to the

transformation of government; Siddique (2016) and Mahmood (2016) also support this claim.

However, it is not clear from the current literature that how the dynamics of confidence and trust

work, and how they change over a period of time (Wolak and Palus, 2010). Therefore, it becomes

important to consider confidence and trust as a single entity, due to their inseparable nature when

governance is involved.

Furthermore, both performance of the government and citizen satisfaction have been identified as

important constructs affecting citizens’ confidence and trust (Bean, 2015). There is a need to

examine new determinants of government performance and citizen satisfaction that have not yet

been considered in the literature; for instance, determinants of e-participation and citizen

satisfaction in e-participation (Alharbi et al., 2016). This argument can be extended to government

transformation as a determinant of government performance and citizen satisfaction. There is also

a need to understand how transformation of government as a construct affects trust and confidence

in government, in the presence of factors such as government performance and citizen satisfaction.



This research problem is applicable to Bahrain. Knowledge about the relationship between

transformation of government, government performance, citizen satisfaction and trust and

confidence in government could offer some solutions capable of arresting the decline of citizen

trust in governments.

2.3.2 Theories on Citizen Trust and Confidence

This section will provide a grounded theory for trust and confidence to support the conceptual

model. From the current literature, two theories were found supportive of trust and confidence,

which are micro-performance theory (Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003) and exit-voice theory

(Fornell et al., 1996; Hirschman, 1970; Morgeson et al., 2011).

This research is expanding the investigation conducted by Morgeson et al. (2011) to further

investigate the concept of trust and confidence in government through a transformed government.

The conceptual model proposed by Morgeson et al. (2011) was based on theories related to the

marketing discipline that focused on formation of consumer attitude (Bearden and Teal, 1983;

Cadotte et al., 1987; Churchill and Surprenant, 1982; Fornell et al., 1996; Oliver, 1980;

Parasuraman et al., 1991). Many studies (Donnelly et al., 1995; Fornell et al., 1996; Fornell et al.,

2009a, 2009b; James, 2009; Poister and Henry, 1994; Van Ryzin et al., 2004b) have adapted,

applied and used these theories and models in the government for specifically exploring citizens’

attitude towards services provided by the government.

This research will focus on the core theory identified by Morgeson et al. (2011), which is the exit-

voice theory (Hirschman, 1970). It states that when customers are satisfied, there are fewer

complaints and loyalty is increased. Otherwise, customers have the option to exit (move to a

competitor) or voice their complaints. The model developed by Morgeson et al. (2011) was tested

and validated to understand citizens’ trust and confidence in government in an e-government and

managing citizen expectations context. It can thus be used for this research to build a model that

investigates the influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence,

mediated by citizens’ perceived performance of government and citizen satisfaction.



The second theory was the micro-performance theory that supports the relationships between

performance of the government and citizens’ satisfaction as well as between citizens’ satisfaction

and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. It is very simple and straightforward, and

considers trust in government as the ultimate outcome. Better performance of government results

in satisfied citizens, which in turn enhances their trust in government (Van de Walle and

Bouckaert, 2003). A number of prior studies (Kampen et al., 2006; Kampe et al., 2003; Van de

Walle and Bouckaert, 2003) have used the micro-performance theory to understand the

relationship between government performance and trust, which is mediated by citizen satisfaction.

Therefore, the micro-performance theory and the aforementioned studies can be considered as

useful guides for investigating the relationship between transformation of government, citizen

satisfaction, and citizen trust and confidence in government. In the context of this research, the

transformed government has the potential to increase the number of satisfied citizens, which in

turn enhances citizen trust and confidence in government.

Although the micro-performance theory supports the proposed conceptual model to some extent,

it has not been used in the e-government literature or the transformation of government literature,

if one can call it so. In contrast, exit-voice theory has been tested, validated and used in the e-

government literature, and is therefore regarded as the dominant theory for this research to support

the proposed conceptual model.

2.4 Transformation of Government

Although digital government initiatives have been introduced in most parts of the world, some of

which are in their advanced stages, citizens’ trust in governments still remains a concerning issue

for most (Bean, 2015; Edwards, 2015; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; World Employment

and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017). Moreover, many of the initiatives that have been

implemented, very few have achieved real transformation of government (i.e. fundamental

changes to the way core functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in

performance and efficiency). As such, there is a need to understand how transformation of

government as a construct affects citizens’ trust and confidence in government in the presence of

factors such as, government performance and citizen satisfaction (Bannister and Connolly, 2011;

Kim et al., 2009; Morgeson et al., 2011; Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Weerakkody et al., 2009;



Welch et al., 2005). Since there is no single definition for the term transformation of government

(Bannister and Connolly, 2011; West, 2004), it should be given proper consideration in this

research. In many studies, this term refers to improvement of operational efficiency (Seifert and

Chung, 2009; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005) and changes in process, structure,

lines of authority, focus, power, and so on (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Cabinet Office, 2005;

Moon and Norris, 2005; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016). Furthermore, some researchers (Layne

and Lee, 2001; Lee, 2007; Siau and Long, 2005; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016) and international

organizations (European Commission, 2015; United Nations, 2014) have considered

transformation as a stage of digital government development.

In addition, Bonham et al. (2001) previously defined the stages of transformation and pointed out

that the final stage can be defined as using technology to “transform how government functions

are conceived, organized and executed” (p. 6). The stages of transformation may be expressed in

terms of quality, rather than being directly focused on the changes in the process and structure.

Such stages can cluster the transformation. However, it does provide the actual definition of

transformation, which is yet not fully understood, and requires further investigation (Bannister and

Connolly, 2011; West, 2004). The key focus was thus technical, rather than on government’s core

businesses and functions, resulting in the development of means to deliver services provided by

governments (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; O’Neill, 2009; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016).

E-government has been an area of interest for IS researchers since the last two decades, which is

the main reason for this technical focus on transformation of government (Waller and

Weerakkody, 2016). These conflicting conclusions on the definitions and role of transformation

of government lead a number of researchers to define it as changing the policy instrument set

chosen to implement policy (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr

et al, 2005). Researchers have argued that transformation is about changing the government

functions and policies, and not about developing new websites or other innovative ways to deliver

government services (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016). Here, ICT

plays a major role in changing government policies, which is referred to as ICT-enabled

government transformation. As it can be seen here, the focus is on changing public administration,

which can be referred to real transformation of government.



Furthermore, Janssen and Shu (2008) have defined transformational government as transparent,

accountable, efficient, and agile. However, they found that few governments are adapting to these

elements, which makes the problem much acute. Therefore, this research is focused on the

relationship between transparency, accountability, technology, citizen expectations and e-

government and transformational government. In addition, Bannister and Connolly (2011) find

that government transformation is described as fluid, and yet a question in the literature is left

unanswered that is the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. However, in order to be able to measure the governmental

transformation, the trust of citizens is required. In line with arguments from Bannister and

Connolly (2011) and Janssen and Shu (2008), citizen expectation is considered as an important

element, and is thus a part of the proposed conceptual model for this research. In addition, citizen

trust is required, which is supported by their expectations.

Transformation of government has been investigated towards trusted services provided to the

public, rather than being focused on processes delivered through ICT only; therefore, technology

and e-government play a vital role in transformation of government (Bannister and Connolly,

2011). Moreover, other factors were called to be discussed along with technology and e-

government. Hudson (2006) found that performance plays a role towards trust in the government,

and other researchers supported this claim (Abramson, 1983; Maddox and Lilie, 1984; Nye et al.,

1997). E-government mainly transforms government, and with the use of ICT change will lead to

better performance of the government. Therefore, performance is a component that should be

considered a part of the conceptual model proposed in this study.

From the above arguments, it can be noted that literature has conflicting definitions for

transformation of government, which needs to be investigated further. Thus, transformation of

government will also be included in the conceptual model for this research. For the purpose of this

research, Transformation of Government is defined as fundamental changes to the way core

functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency.

In the context of Bahrain, no previous studies have investigated transformation of government, or

factors influencing it. The outcome of this research is expected to add to the current knowledge,



whilst offering a better understanding on the concept of transformation of government, and the

role of transparency, accountability, technology, citizen expectations, and e-government.

2.4.1 Theory on Transformation of Government

From the current literature, only one theory was found supportive to the concept of transformation

of government, which is the public administration theory (Zouridis and Thaens, 2003). This section

will provide a grounded theory for transformation of government to support the conceptual model

proposed in this research.

The public administration theory supports the relationship between transformation of government

and performance; the traditional government/public administration will change and result in an

ICT-enabled transformed government/public administration that integrates transparency and

accountability into its work, functions and activities, and manages citizen expectations. This

transformation will result in improved government services, and enhance efficiency and

effectiveness of the transformed government. The public administration theory is related to this

research, as it covers the main aspects of citizen expectations whilst also considering the

performance aspects.

According to Zouridis and Thaens (2003), the fundamental character of public administration and

the basic structure of its institutions are affected by the transformed government.

2.5 E-government and its Relationship with Transformation of Government, and Citizens’

Trust and Confidence

Trust in government has faced a continuous decline, which has been left unresolved. Literature has

investigated digital government initiatives with an objective of fulfilling this gap (Bannister and

Connolly, 2011; Grimmelikhuijsen, 2009; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and

Mossberger, 2006). Despite many attempts, outcomes of the undertaken studies investigating the

relationship between trust, government and digital government, are conflicting in nature. For

instance, while some authors (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2008; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010;

Srivastava and Teo, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004)

proposed that digital government enhances trust in government, the others (Grimmelikhuijsen,



2009; McNeal et al., 2008; Morgreson et al., 2011; Pina and Royo, 2009; West, 2004) stated that

trust in government can only be enhanced through transparency in information and services.

According to Mahmood and Weerakkody (2014), this conflicting relationship needs to be further

investigated, which is expected to better our understanding of the relationship between e-

government and citizen trust. Therefore, this study will focus on the relationship between e-

government and citizen trust, mediated by other factors (identified in the literature) that may have

an influence on citizen trust and confidence in government.

West (2004) stated that e-government refers to the delivery of government-related information and

services made available to citizens through online means or other digital mechanisms. E-

government was adopted by many countries with an expectation of improving citizen trust and

confidence. However, despite spending a high amount of money on digital government projects,

the developing countries in particular still face the problem of decline in citizen trust and

confidence.

Some researchers argued that the failure of such e-government projects was due to the focus on

technical aspects, and not on government’s core businesses and functions resulting in the

development of means to deliver government services (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Gunawong

and Gao, 2017; Omar et al., 2017; O’Neill, 2009; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016). On the other

hand, some researchers (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; O’Neill, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger,

2006; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016) believe that transparency may also have a role in obtaining

citizen trust and confidence in the government. However, due to the lack of investigation on the

concept of transformation of government, the influence of e-government and other factors has still

not been comprehensively discussed in the literature.

2.6 Technology and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and Citizen Trust

and Confidence

According to Hiller and Belanger (2001), adopting technology through IT services throughout

government operations will help government fulfil their responsibility towards citizen in a more

effective and transparent manner. Thus, technology plays a role in supporting citizen trust and



confidence in government as it provides transparent service. This still leaves a gap unaddressed,

which is the relationship between technology and citizen trust and confidence in government,

without considering other factors that may also have an influence on trust and confidence.

Some researchers have argued that technology in government refers to IT and its impact on

business management (Al Rub, 2006). Other researchers (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller

and Weerakkody, 2016) have highlighted the need for technology in changing government policies

by being a part of the policy design process. Thus, it can be argued that changing government

policies could also be considered as transformation of government. Therefore, there is a need to

investigate the relationship between technology, e-government and transparency, which may lead

to citizen trust and confidence. Technology is expected to work closely with transparency and e-

government, resulting in transformation of the government that is further expected to enhance

citizen trust and confidence in government.

2.7 Citizen Expectations and their Relationship with Transformation of Government and

Citizen Trust and Confidence in Government

According to Parasuraman et al. (1988), citizen expectation is defined as customers’ perceptions

of what a service should offer. In case of trust and confidence, citizens have a set of expectations

in terms of what the government should offer. In support of this argument, Nam (2012) states that

public expectation is the most determining factor that facilitates decline in public’s trust of

government, and the same becomes applicable to Bahrain. Morgeson et al. (2011) investigated the

relationship between citizen expectation, satisfaction, citizen trust and confidence in the agency

and Wessington. They concluded that e-government does not lead to higher citizen expectations;

however, there was a significant relationship between citizen expectation and confidence with the

agency. Therefore, citizen expectation is also an element that should be considered in investigating

the factors that influence trust and confidence in government.

As mentioned previously, there are hardly any studies that have considered the relationship

between transformation of government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011) and trust and confidence

in government, mediated by other influential factors highlighted in the literature on e-government,

technology, transparency and accountability. Therefore, this study will investigate citizen



expectation that is expected to work with e-government, technology, transparency and

accountability towards transformation of government, which in turn is expected to lead to citizen

trust and confidence in government.

2.8 Transparency and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and Citizen

Trust and Confidence in Government

According to Chen et al. (2003), transparency is defined as the ability of outsiders to assess the

true position of a company, which is in line with arguments in literature (Bannister and Connolly,

2011; O’Neill, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016).

Transparency could be a key element for enhancing citizen trust and confidence in government.

Transparency is expected to work closely with e-government (Garcia-Murillo, 2013; Mahmood

and Weerakkody, 2014) and technology (Garcia-Murillo, 2013; Chen et al., 2013) leading to

transformation of government.

However, as argued by some authors (O’Neill, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), transparency

is key for enhancing citizen trust and confidence in government. Therefore, transparency cannot

be neglected or investigated separately. This argument is also supported in literature (Chen et al.,

2003; Song and Lee, 2013; Welch et al., 2005), which highlights that transparency is a core element

for achieving transformation of government. Technology plays a major role in increasing

transparency, which in turn enhances the performance of government and improves citizen trust

and confidence.

2.9 Accountability and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and Citizen

Trust and Confidence in Government

Accountability goes along with transparency and they are both considered as key elements for

transformation of government (Amaliah et al., 2015; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al.,

2009). On the other hand, Chen et al. (2003) defines accountability as the accountability of

management to the stakeholders. In this regard, some authors (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim

et al., 2009; Norquist, 2007) argued that accountability and transparency could influence the

transformation of government. Therefore, accountability will be investigated as part of this study,

which is expected to work with e-government, technology and transparency towards

transformation of government.



2.10 Theories supporting Factors Predicted to Influence Transformation of Government

For the aforementioned factors chosen for this study, grounded theories previously used in research

by various studies have been listed in table 2.6 below.

Table 2.4 Theories Supporting Factors Predicted to work with Transformation of Government

Theory Construct

Public administration theory (Zouridis and Thaens, 2003)

EGOV

TECH

TRANSPY

ACOUNT

Institutional theory (Bekkers and Meijer, 2012; Kim et al., 2009; Luna-Reyes and Gil-García, 2012; Pina et al.,

2010; Weerakkody et al., 2016)

EGOV

TECH

TRANSPY

ACOUNT

Structuration Theory (Orlikowski 1992; Orlikowski et al., 1995; Orlikowski, 2000; Meijer et al., 2012)

EGOV

TECH

User adoption theories (example Technology Acceptance Model, TAM; Diffusion of Innovation, DOI) (see

Gilbert and Balestrini, 2004)

EGOV

TECH

Agent-principal theory (Kim et al., 2009)

TRANSPY

ACOUNT

Stakeholder theory (Chan et al., 2003; Pardo and Scholl, 2002; Scholl, 2001; Tennert and Schroeder, 1999) EXPEC

2.10.1 Theories Supporting E-government and Technology

The first theory is the public administration theory. E-government initiatives result in

transforming the government and governance to e-government and e-governance. As such, e-

government redefines key parts of public administration as operating core, implementation of

public policy and democratic supervision. Here, the traditional processes are transformed into

information-based processes (Zouridis and Thaens, 2003). As for technology and

transformation of government, e-government initiatives require different government entities

to use ICT technologies including hardware and software. Additionally, ICT can be used by

government entities for other purposes as well, such as development of new policies,

supporting citizens and strategic processes, and so on. These ICT initiatives will contribute to

transforming government to be an ICT-enabled transformed government (Zouridis and Thaens,

2003).

The second theory is the structuration theory that backs up the use of technologies by different

government entities. This includes technologies needed for e-government initiatives as well as for

their own purposes, and both would result in institutional transformation (Meijer et al., 2012). The

third theory is related to user adoption. As pointed out above, introduction of technologies can



result in transforming the way government manages its functions, and delivers its services to the

citizens. Therefore, it can be considered an institutional transformation. However, for a successful

ICT-enabled transformation of government, adoption of government services by citizens should

be clear and visible. User adoption theories, for example, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)

and Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) (Gilbert and Balestrini, 2004) would assist in studying the

adoption of government services by the citizens.

The last theory is the institutional theory that has been referred by many researchers (Bekkers and

Meijer, 2012; Kim et al., 2009; Luna-Reyes and Gil-García, 2012; Pina et al., 2010; Weerakkody

et al., 2016) to explain and understand the ICT-enabled government. ICT included in e-

government is considered a proper institution, taking into account its relationships with the

surrounding environment, organizational aspects, stakeholders, communications with other

government agencies, interaction with citizens and socio-economic impact on the country, in

general, and the government, in particular. As such, the institutional theory along with its three

forces - coercive, mimetic and normative forces, would fit the context of this research. The

applicability of institutional theory comes from a number of perspectives. The main one is related

to the implementation of ICT in e-government, and issues surrounding its implementation

(Bekkers and Meijer, 2012; Kim et al., 2009; Luna-Reyes and Gil-García, 2012; Pina et al., 2010;

Weerakkody et al., 2016). In this context, institutional theory is often used along with other

theories such as Diffusion of Innovations Theory (Pina et al., 2010). Furthermore, the Technology

enactment framework of the institutional theory has been used along with dynamic simulation,

particularly, system dynamics (Luna-Reyes and Gil-García, 2012).

2.10.2 Theories Supporting Transparency and Accountability

The first theory here is the public administration theory. In a transformed government, adoption of

transparency supported by ICT would result in making government-related information accessible

by all stakeholders, including general citizens. This by itself changes the way public administration

works, acts and interacts, and how the citizens are given the freedom to appeal and escalate, if

needed. The second theory is the institutional theory. ICT-enabled transformed government results

in enhancing government’s transparency and accountability, which in turn affects the



organizational aspect and institutional arrangements, as well as the way government institutions

work and interact with their stakeholders, including citizens (Kim et al., 2009; Weerakkody et al.,

2016).

The third theory is the agent-principle theory. Here, Kim et al. (2009) referred agent to government

and principle to citizens. This is a kind of relationship where the principle (citizens) monitors and

the agent (government) performs and reports on the progress supported by evidence (Kim et al.,

2009). The same principle applies to transformed government, which adopts transparency through,

for example, making the necessary information related to all services, processes and procedures,

available to the citizens. Additionally, the agent (government) can share different reports such as

performance reports, KPIs achieved and cases dealt with. Accountability of government comes

by default into the picture, when such details are made available to citizens.

2.10.3 Theory supporting Citizen Expectations

The stakeholder theory states that, if an organization manages effectively its relationships with its

stakeholders, it will perform well; otherwise, the performance will be lower (Freeman, 2010). The

relationship here refers to interaction with stakeholders, involvement of stakeholders in the

implementation and managing stakeholders’ expectations. In the context of this research, citizen

expectations of a truly transformed government should be managed, and this can be performed by

introducing proper communication channels and introduction of a consultation process on all

aspects of government functions, activities and services (Scott et al., 2004).

2.11 Performance of Government and its Relationship with Transformation of

Government and Citizen Trust and Confidence

Digital government or e-government was used by the government with the predication that it will

improve government performance, leading to citizen trust and confidence in government (Al-Shafi

and Weerakkody, 2008; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010; Srivastava and Teo, 2009; Tolbert and

Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004). Furthermore, Hudson (2006) highlighted that

performance plays a vital role towards trust in the government, which was also supported by other

researchers (Abramson, 1983; Maddox and Lilie, 1984; Nye et al., 1997).



The literature contains studies related to government performance and factors that may influence

citizen trust and confidence, but the studies do not focus on the relationship between

transformation of government and citizen trust and confidence (Bannister and Connolly, 2011;

Kim et al., 2009; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016; West, 2004). A factor contributing to the decline

is citizen expectations from the government, which is once again related to the nature of services

provided by the government (Orren, 1997; Peters, 1999). Performance is the organization’s

potential to make use of its own resources in an effective and efficient manner (Hameed and Al-

Shawabkha, 2013). To a certain extent, this argument can be associated with the transformation of

government, as it leads to the use of the same resources. Citizens perceive performance as a

determinant of satisfaction and trust (Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011).

Therefore, the performance of an organization is based on their successful operation that affects

the satisfaction of all stakeholders, including citizens (Kim et al., 2009; Morgeson et al., 2011;

Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004). This study will thus investigate

government performance that is expected to work with transformation of government and citizens’

satisfaction, which in turn is expected to lead to citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

2.12 Citizen Satisfaction and its Relationship with Transformation of Government and

Citizen Trust and Confidence

Citizen Satisfaction is defined as ‘the sum total of a citizen’s sense of fulfilment with his or her

experience’ (Morgeson et al., 2011). As mentioned above, citizens’ expectations plays a vital role

in their trust and confidence in government, as the stakeholders, who are the citizens, have specific

expectations from the government (Orren, 1997; Peters, 1999). Some researchers argue that

citizens’ satisfaction is a major factor that affects public trust in government (Bean, 2015;

Morgeson et al., 2011; Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Teo et al., 2008). There is a clear relationship

between citizen satisfaction and citizen expectations (Morgeson et al., 2011; Morgeson and

Petrescu, 2011).

Two studies conducted by (Morgeson et al., 2011; Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011) to test the

relationship between citizens’ expectation and citizens’ satisfaction leading to citizens’ satisfaction

with the government.



This research proposes to investigate the relationship between citizens’ expectation and

transformation of government, leading to citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence

in government. This is supported by arguments by researchers (Bannister and Connolly, 2011;

Janssen and Shu, 2008), who highlight that citizens’ expectations are considered an important

element in the formula of transformation of government.

2.13 Theory Supporting Performance of Government and Citizen Satisfaction and their

Relationship with Citizens Trust and Confidence in Government

From the current literature, only one theory was found supportive of performance of government

and citizens’ satisfaction, which is micro-performance theory (Kampen et al., 2003; Kampen et

al., 2006; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003).

The micro-performance theory supports the relationships between performance of the government

and citizens’ satisfaction as well as citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. It is very simple and straightforward, and considers trust in government as the

ultimate outcome. Better performance of government results in satisfied citizens, which in turn

enhances trust in government (Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003). Many studies (Kampen et al.,

2006; Kampen et al., 2003; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003) have used the micro-performance

theory to understand the relationship between performance of government and trust in government,

mediated by citizens’ satisfaction. As such, the theory and these studies can be considered as useful

guides in investigating the relationships between transformation of government, citizens’

satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. For this research, transformed

government has the potential to increase the number of satisfied citizens, which in turn, will

enhance citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

2.14 Gap found in Literature

From the undertaken literature review in this chapter, it is noted that there is no clear definition of

‘transformation of government’ till date, which does not provide enough knowledge on the

relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. Despite the few studies conducted to investigate the problem of citizens’ trust and

confidence in government, there is hardly any research studying the transformation of government



as part of a conceptual model. Other researchers have identified various factors such as, citizen

satisfaction, performance of government, e-government, technology, transparency and

accountability. There is however, no comprehensive study that integrates these factors into one

conceptual model and measures how they work together towards the transformation of

government, leading to citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

Therefore, this research aims to investigate the relationship of e-government, technology,

transparency, expectations, and accountability on transformation of government. This research

will also investigate the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government, mediated by performance of government and citizens’ satisfaction.

2.15 Chapter Summary

Chapter 2 provides an extensive review of the literature, and is focused on the available models

previously employed by the researchers in the area of citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

The literature review provides a summary of all components and associated theories that will be a

part of the conceptual model for this research. The following chapter will present the proposed

conceptual model and the hypotheses drawn in line with the existing literature to support the

investigation being undertaken by this research.

Chapter 3: Conceptual Model


CHAPTER 3: CONCEPTUAL MODEL



Chapter 3 : Conceptual Model

3.1 Introduction

Chapter 2 provided an insight on the challenges faced by the government in dealing with the

decline of citizens’ trust and confidence in government over the last decades. Review of the

literature showed that there is a lack of knowledge on how digital transformation of government

can reverse the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence. Additionally, factors that were already

investigated by other researchers have been identified as factors influencing citizens’ trust and

confidence and transformation of government. This chapter presents the proposed hypotheses to

investigate how digital transformation of government influences citizens’ trust and confidence in

government.

This chapter is structured as follows. Sections 3.2 to 3.9 describe the relationships between

different variables of the proposed conceptual model, which is presented in section 3.10. Finally,

section 3.11, summarizes the overall chapter.

3.2 Relationship between e-government and transformation of government

E-government has been widely investigated by various researchers, and trust has been identified

as a key factor in the adoption of e-government services (Al-Khouri, 2012; Al-Shafi and

Weerakkody, 2010; Osman et al., 2011). Literature shows that e-government has been investigated

in relation to citizens’ trust through different models. For example, Morgeson and Petrescu (2011)

consider e-government as a performance antecedent, mediated by satisfaction towards citizen trust

and confidence. Bannister and Connolly (2011) have also investigated the direct relationship of e-

government with citizens’ trust and confidence in government. West (2004), on the other hand,

recommended the relationship between e-government and transformation of government. The

existing studies did not investigate the relationship with transformation of government, leading to

the citizens’ trust and confidence in government (see table 3.1).

From the above discussion, the following hypothesis is drawn:

H1a: E-government positively influences transformation of government.



3.3 Relationship between technology and transformation of government

Some researchers pointed out that there is need to investigate the relationship between technology

and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Other researchers (Bannister and Connolly,

2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016) highlighted the important role of technology in changing

government policies by being a part of the policy design process, which is also considered as

transformation of government. In line with this argument, there is a need to investigate the

relationship of technology with transformation of government, which is predicted to have an

influence on citizens’ trust and confidence in government. The models developed by Morgenson

et al. (2011) and Morgeson and Petrescu (2011) did not focus on technology as recommended by

various other authors (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Hiller and Belanger, 2001; Waller and

Weerakkody, 2016).

H1b: Technology positively influences transformation of government

3.4 Relationship between citizen expectations and transformation of government

Citizens’ expectation was defined by Parasuraman et al. (1988) as what the customers think or

have an idea of the services should offer. This argument was supported by Nam (2012) by

highlighting that public expectation which is considered in this study, as citizens’ expectation is

the most determining factor that facilitates decline in the public’s trust of government. For

instance, (Morgeson et al., 2011) investigated the relationship between citizens’ expectation,

satisfaction, citizens’ trust and confidence in the agency and Wessington. Morgeson et al. (2011)

study focused on the relationship between citizens’ expectation and citizens’ satisfaction leading

to citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

It is clear from the arguments presented above and chapter 2 that citizen expectations have a direct

or indirect relationship with transformation of government. However, as stated previously, hardly

any studies have considered the relationship between transformation of government (Bannister and

Connolly, 2011) and citizens’ trust and confidence in government which provides a solid

justification of investigating this relationship through the below hypothesis (see table 3.1).



From the above discussion, the following hypothesis can be drawn:

H1c: Expectation positively influences transformation of government

3.5 Relationship between transparency and transformation of government

Transparency is a measure or a tool for an outsider to assess the true operations undertaken by a

company (Chen et al., 2003). Many studies (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; O’Neill, 2009; Tolbert

and Mossberger, 2006; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016) highlighted the necessity of transparency

in building citizen trust and confidence. In a similar argument, other studies (Chen et al., 2003;

Mahmood and Weerakkody, 2014; Song and Lee, 2013; Welch et al., 2005) argued that

transparency works closely with e-government towards transformation of government. Thus, the

following hypothesis is drawn:

H1d: Transparency positively influences transformation of government

3.6 Relationship between accountability and transformation of government

Some researchers stated that accountability works closely with transparency, and cannot be

neglected (Amaliah et al., 2015; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009). Accountability

was defined differently by researchers; for instance, Chen et al. (2003) looked at accountability

from a decision-making and characteristic aspect, rather than operational. Various researchers

argued that transparency and accountability are related (Amaliah et al., 2015; Bannister and

Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009), and yet, hardly any research included both accountability and

transparency to test citizens’ trust and confidence in government. It was further argued that both

accountability and transparency could influence the transformation of government (Bannister and

Connolly, 2011).


H1e: Accountability positively influences transformation of government



3.7 Relationship between transformation of government and performance

Bannister and Connolly (2011) stated that government transformation is described as a fluid and

yet a question in the literature is left unanswered that is the relationship between transformation of

government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Janssen and Shu (2008) defined

transformational government as transparent, accountable, efficient, and agile. There is no clear

understanding of the elements of transformation of government, and how it influences citizen trust

and confidence in government. In line with arguments from Bannister and Connolly (2011) and

Janssen and Shu (2008), it was predicted that transformation of government influences

performance of government, which leads to citizen trust and confidence.

As stated earlier, the relationship between e-government and transformation of government needs

to be investigated (West, 2004) which is drawn as H1a; the relationship between technology and

transformation of government, also defined by Hiller and Belanger (2001) and Waller and

Weerakkody (2016) is drawn as H1b; the relationship between citizen expectation and

transformation of government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011) is drawn as

H1c; the relationship between transparency and transformation of government (Chen et al., 2003;

Mahmood and Weerakkody, 2014; Song and Lee, 2013; Welch et al., 2005) is drawn as H1d; and

the relationship between accountability and transformation of government (Amaliah et al., 2015;

Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009) is drawn as H1e. All these hypotheses will be

investigated on how they work with transformation of government, leading to citizens’ trust and

confidence, mediated by performance of government and citizens’ satisfaction.


H2: Transformation of government positively influences performance of government

3.8 Relationship between performance of government and satisfaction

According to Hudson (2006), performance plays a role towards trust in the government, which is

supported by other researchers (Abramson, 1983; Maddox and Lilie, 1984; Nye et al., 1997). The

models developed by Morgeson et al. (2011) and Morgeson and Petrescu (2011) also support this

argument, as various antecedents were tested as a part of performance, mediated by satisfaction



leading to citizens’ trust and confidence in government. However, Morgeson and Petrescu (2011)

defined service, technology, e-government, expectations, age, education, income and gender as

performance antecedents. This research proposes to test the relationship between performance of

government and satisfaction leading to citizens’ trust and confidence, taking into account the

relationship between transformation of government and other working factors defined above.


H3: Performance of Government positively influences citizens’ satisfaction in government

3.9 Relationship between satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in government

While researchers are still investigating the possible relationship between e-government and

citizens’ declining trust in government, models that can provide a solution to this are still in their

early stages. For instance, Morgeson et al. (2011) investigated the relationship between the Internet

and trust in Washington (US), mediated by e-government and influenced by other factors.

However, the authors could not establish a significant relationship with trust in government. On

the other hand, Morgeson and Petrescu (2011) developed an extended model, with related

components of performance as antecedents toward citizens’ satisfaction. Other studies (Bannister

and Connolly, 2011; West 2004) highlighted the importance of transformation of government,

which is predicted to lead to citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

Similar results were arrived at by another piece of research conducted by Teo et al. (2008). It

investigated the relationship between trust in government and e-government on one hand, and user

satisfaction and intention to use e-government, on the other, using trust as the independent variable

rather than dependent. It can thus be concluded that satisfaction and trust affect citizen engagement

with government. Satisfaction is influenced by performance, and performance is affected by a

number of aspects, including technology that is used in the government, the use of e-government

as a tool, and citizens’ expectations of the government. When these three aspects are involved, a

traditional government setup will not be the same and change has to be brought in, with

transparency becoming another important factor that is needed in the government.



Therefore, e-government, technology and expectation need to be linked to transformation.

However, transformation without transparency and accountability is unlikely to improve

performance (Bannister and Connolly, 2011). Therefore, transformation must be influenced by

transparency and accountability (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009). Transformation

here is considered an independent variable that is expected to increase citizens’ engagement with

their governments, which is the dependent variable. However, the relationship between

independent and dependent variables is affected by mediating variables (Morgeson et al., 2011).

Two such variables that have been identified by previous researchers are government performance

and satisfaction of citizens (Kim et al., 2009; Morgeson et al., 2011; Norquist, 2007; Tolbert and

Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; Welch and Hinnant's, 2002; West, 2004). From the above

argument, it is clear that trust and confidence in government will be the dependent variable in this

model; this relationship is supported by Bannister and Connolly (2011) and Morgeson et al. (2011).


H4: Satisfaction positively influences citizens’ trust and confidence in government



3.10 The proposed conceptual model and extracted theories

From the above arguments and drawn hypotheses, the following conceptual model is proposed in

this research (figure 3.1), with the theoretical background presented in table 3.1.

Figure 3.1 Proposed Conceptual Model

It is worth highlighting that this research adopts a citizen centric perspective, which means that

this research is about citizens’ perceptions of all constructs and hypotheses proposed in the

conceptual model.



Table 3.1 Theoretical Background for the drawn Relationships

Construct Hypothesis

#

Relationship

Affected

Supporting authors for the

Relationship

Supporting Theories

EGOV H1a EGOV → TRANSF

Andersen and Henriksen (2006); Bannister and Connolly (2011); Baum and Di Maio (2000);

Bellamy and Taylor (1998); Bonham et al.

(2001); Coursey and Norris (2008); Kraemer and King (2006); Layne and Lee (2001)

Public administration theory (Zouridis and Thaens, 2003);

Institutional theory (Bekkers and Meijer, 2012;

Kim et al., 2009; Luna-Reyes and Gil-García, 2012; Pina et al., 2010; Weerakkody et al.,

2016)

Structuration Theory (Orlikowski 1992; Orlikowski et al., 1995; Orlikowski, 2000;

Meijer et al., 2012)

User adoption theories (example Technology Acceptance Model, TAM and Diffusion of

Innovation, DOI) (see Gilbert and Balestrini,

2004)

TECH H1b TECH → TRANSF

Bannister and Connolly (2011); Bingham (2010); Bonham et al. (2001); Kim et al. (2009);

Weerakkody et al. (2009)

Public administration theory (Zouridis and Thaens, 2003);

Institutional theory (Bekkers and Meijer, 2012;

Kim et al., 2009; Luna-Reyes and Gil-García, 2012; Pina et al., 2010; Weerakkody et al.,

2016)

Structuration Theory (Orlikowski 1992; Orlikowski et al., 1995; Orlikowski, 2000;

Meijer et al., 2012) User adoption theories (example Technology

Acceptance Model, TAM and Diffusion of

Innovation, DOI) (see Gilbert and Balestrini, 2004)

TRANSPY H1c TRANSPY →

TRANSF

Brown (1999); Fountain (2001); Northrup and

Thorson (2003) Public administration theory (Zouridis and Thaens, 2003);

Agent-principal theory (Kim et al., 2009)

Institutional theory (Kim et al., 2009; Weerakkody et al., 2016)

ACOUNT H1d ACOUNT →

TRANSF

Bannister and Connolly (2011); Bingham

(2010); Demchak et al. (2000); Kauvar (1998);

Norquist (2007)

Public administration theory (Zouridis and

Thaens, 2003);

Agent-principal theory (Kim et al., 2009) Institutional theory (Kim et al., 2009;

Weerakkody et al., 2016)

EXPEC H1e EXPEC → TRANSF

Dalton (2005); Graham and Avery (2013); Seifert and Petersen (2002); Welch et al. (2005)

Stakeholder theory (Chan et al., 2003; Pardo and Scholl, 2002; Scholl, 2001; Tennert and

Schroeder, 1999)

TRANSF H2 TRANSF →

PERFO

Chatfield (2009); Fang (2002); Florini (2000);

Kim et al. (2009)

Public Administration Theory (Zouridis and

Thaens, 2003)

PERFO H3 PERFO →

SATISF

Bouckaert et al. (2005); Heintzman and Marson

(2005); Kampen et al. (2006); Osman et al.

(2011); Tolbert and Mossberger (2006); Van de Walle and Bouckaert (2003); Van de Walle

et al. (2008)

Micro-Performance Theory (Kampen et al.,

2003; Kampen, et al., 2006; Van de Walle and

Bouckaert, 2003)

SATISF H4 SATISF → TRUST &

CONFIDENCE

Bannister and Connolly (2011); Bouckaert et al. (2005); Heintzman and Marson (2005);

Kampen et al. (2006); Tolbert and Mossberger

(2006); Osman et al. (2011); Van de Walle and Bouckaert (2003); Van de Walle et al. (2008);

Welch et al. (2005)

Micro-Performance Theory (Kampen et al., 2003; Kampen, et al., 2006; Van de Walle and

Bouckaert, 2003)

TRUST &

CONFIDENCE

--- --- --- Micro-Performance Theory (Van de Walle and

Bouckaert, 2003) Exit-Voice Theory (Fornell et al., 1996;

Hirschman, 1970; Morgeson et al., 2011)




This chapter provided the background for the conceptual model and proposed hypotheses

supported by arguments highlighted in literature review. Majority of the studies and models

focused on technical, service quality, usability and adoption aspects of ICT-enabled transformation

projects with limited impact on practice and no real transformation of government. For instance,

there were no fundamental changes to the way core government functions were performed to

achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency. As a result, citizens’ trust and confidence

has continued to decline. Therefore, there is a need for better understating how transformation of

government as a construct affects citizens’ trust and confidence in government, in the presence of

other factors such as e-government, technology, citizen expectations, transparency, accountability,

government performance and citizen satisfaction. This research bridges the aforementioned gap

by proposing a conceptual model, which is a first of its kind to investigate the relationship between

transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. The next chapter

will present the methodology that will be followed to investigate this conceptual model.

Chapter 4: Research Methodology


CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY



Chapter 4 : Research Methodology

4.1 Introduction

Chapter 3 presents the conceptual model along with eight hypotheses for investigating the

influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence from citizens’

perspective. In this chapter, the research methodology is presented that includes amongst other

elements research philosophy and design. Elements of this chapter are very important for this

research, and thus the selection of suitable methodology will be based on a thorough review of

available options.

This research is explanatory by nature and positivism will form the governing philosophical

paradigm for this study. A quantitative approach will be employed for this research. The target

audiences are the ordinary citizens living in the Kingdom of Bahrain, who were approached

randomly through the development and distribution of an online survey through different means

such as email, SMS and social media applications. Prior to launching the main survey, pre-test and

pilot test were performed to validate the conceptual model and hypotheses, and to ensure the

reliability of the collected data.

This chapter is structured as follows. Section 4.2 is about the three research philosophies and

justifies the selection of positivism. Section 4.3 discusses different elements of research design:

research purpose, unit of analysis, research data, mode of observation and the time dimension. The

six stages of the research process are also illustrated in this section. Comparisons between

quantitative and qualitative methodologies, as well as the selection of quantitative approach for

this research are provided in section 4.4. As for section 4.5, it discusses sampling process, data

collection tool and different types of questionnaires. Questionnaire development and validation

phase is covered in section 4.6 along with the results of validity and reliability tests applied

following the pilot test. The justifications for selection of SEM are highlighted in section 4.7.

Section 4.8 deals with issues related to ethics approval, with conclusions outlined in section 4.9.



4.2 Research Philosophy

Prior to selecting the research method and commencing with the research design, it is important to

select the appropriate research philosophy, as it establishes the foundation for what follows

(Creswell, 2009). There are three key research philosophical/epistemology

approaches/assumptions: positivist, interpretive, and critical research (Mingers, 2001; Mingers,

2003; Orlikowski and Barooudi, 1991). The two main approaches used in the IS research are

positivist and interpretive (Chen and Hirschheim, 2004; Gregor, 2006; Guba and Linclon, 1994;

Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991; Myers, 1997). However, amongst the two approaches, positivist is

considered as the most popular one in IS research (Mingers, 2003; Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991;

Straub et al., 2004; Yin, 2003; 2009). As for critical research, it is rarely used in IS literature, as it

is applicable to researches where the focus is on conflicts and contradictions.

Positivism is used to test theory for understanding a certain phenomenon that is in question

(Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991). It is mainly associated with facts, figures, measures and numbers

as opposed to researchers’ beliefs and values (Bryman and Bell, 2007; Howe, 1988; Weber, 2004).

The quantitative research method is used where for example, theory is tested, conceptual model is

developed, hypotheses are suggested and validated, data is collected and analysed (Bryman and

Bell, 2007; Saunders et al., 2011). On the other hand, interpretive approach attempts to understand

a certain phenomenon through accessing the ‘meaning’ participants have about the phenomenon

(Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991; Walsham, 1995b). It is mainly associated with beliefs and

intentions researches’ have as opposed to positivism, which is based on figures and measures

(Howe, 1988; Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991; Weber, 2004). The qualitative research method is

used where for example case studies, interviews and ethnographic methods are adopted (Weber,

2004).

Both positivism and interpretive approaches are explaining or reflecting reality, whereas the

critical research approach is about developing/creating/changing reality and promoting

emancipation (Niehaves and Bernd, 2006; Orlikowski and Baroudi 1991). Additionally, it

questions or criticizes the reality and the knowledge gained in an effective and efficient way. As

for the used methodology for critical research, there is no single agreed methodology; however, it

is close to some extant to the interpretive approach (Niehaves and Bernd, 2006). For instance, in



the IS research, the discussed topics in the previous studies were power, gender, digital divide and

IS failure (Niehaves and Bernd, 2006). In this regard, critical research is rarely adopted and can be

considered as a missing approach or paradigm (Chen and Hirschheim, 2004; Richardson and

Robinson, 2007).

In light of the above discussion related to the three philosophy approaches, the most appropriate

one for the research is positivism. The reasons for this selection are: this research is explaining a

reality and not attempting to create a new reality and as such, the third approach that is the critical

research philosophy is eliminated from the selection. Secondly, it is about understanding and

investigating a phenomenon by testing a current theory and not about understanding a certain

phenomenon through accessing the ‘meaning’ participants have about the phenomenon. As such,

the second research philosophy that is the interpretive is eliminated. Third, this research adopts

quantitative research methodology, develops, and validates a conceptual model that is building up

on previous theoretical frameworks and models. The research is related to investigating the

influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government. As

such, the research aim, objectives, research questions, conceptual model and hypotheses indicate

that positivism is a more suitable philosophy for this research.

4.3 Research Design

Prior to selecting research methodology, and collecting and analyzing the data, it is very critical to

agree on the appropriate research design to be followed throughout the different phases of this

research. Research design here refers to a framework or systematic approach to be adopted to

fulfil the aim and objectives of this research (Avison et al., 1999; Bryman, 2004; Bryman and Bell,

2007; Creswell, 2003; Gable, 1994; Jick, 1979). The key elements of research design are explained

in the subsections below.

4.3.1 Research Purpose

The three types of research purpose are exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory (Robson, 2002;

Sekaran, 2003). Exploratory research is about exploring the phenomena through understanding the

problem and looking for ideas and insights (Robson, 2002). It comes with qualitative research

methodology, where interviews and focus groups are often used. The second type is the descriptive



research and from its name, it is clear that researchers look for an accurate description of the

phenomena in question (Robson, 2002). As opposed to exploratory research, the key variables are

defined, and either a quantitative or qualitative approach can be used (Robson, 2002). The third

type is the explanatory research, which is also known as hypothesis testing or casual relationship.

From its names, it is clear that the key variables and relationships are defined, and a quantitative

research methodology is associated with it. Accordingly, it is about explaining the phenomena in

question through testing the defined hypothesis between variables so that the relationships between

these variables can be explained (Robson, 2002; Saunders, 2011).

In addition to investigating the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’

trust and confidence in government, this research identifies factors that influence transformation

of government and determines the relationships amongst these factors. In doing so, a conceptual

model along with hypotheses is developed, validated and tested here. As per the above definitions,

the purpose of this research is explanatory, as it explains and predicts relationships amongst

defined variables and hypotheses of the developed conceptual model.

4.3.2 Unit of Analysis

This research investigates the influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust, and

citizens’ confidence in the government. As such, the target audience is the citizen, who is the unit

of analysis for this research.

4.3.3 Research Data

There are two types of research data, which are primary and secondary (Collis and Hussey, 2003).

Primary research data is the data collected by the researcher for addressing the research aim,

objectives and questions to be answered (Collis and Hussey, 2003). Surveys, case studies,

laboratory experiment and action research, for instance, can be used to collect such data (Bryman

and Bell, 2007; Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991). The second type is the secondary data, where the

collected data is not related directly to the research in hand such as published summaries, reports

and statistics. The secondary data may be suitable when there is a need to conduct a comparative

research nationally or internationally. The choice between the primary data and secondary data is

based on the research questions to be addressed. For instance, some researches may need to use



primary data, while others only need secondary data. In some cases, both primary and secondary

data maybe used (Saunders, 2011).

In order to address the research questions set for this research, primary data is used for collecting

the related data. In particular, data related to every defined construct within the conceptual model

for this study will be collected from people living in the Kingdom of Bahrain.

4.3.4 Choice of Research Design (Mode of Observation)

There are four key types of research design: survey, case study, laboratory experiment and action

research (Orlikowski and Baroudi, 1991). Since the unit of analysis for this research is the citizen,

survey mode will be the suitable choice. This will enable data to be collected from a large number

of citizens, which will become very difficult with the other three options. Quantitative research

methodology rather than the qualitative method fits better with the survey mode of observation.

More details on the survey approach can be found in section 4.5 of this chapter.

4.3.5 Time Dimension

With survey chosen to be the selected mode of observation for this research, the next question is

whether the survey should be conducted once at a defined time, or more than once over a given

period of time (Bryman and Bell, 2007; Churchill and Dawn, 1999; Sekaran, 2003). The aim,

objectives, questions, limited budget and timeframe defined for the accomplishment of this

research make the choice of a cross-sectional survey better suited than a longitudinal survey. This

choice is consistent with similar studies conducted previously in IS research (e.g. Morgeson et al.,

2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006).

4.3.6 Stages of the Research Process

This section provides an overview of the process followed for accomplishing this research, with

the details of each stage and process covered in different chapters of this thesis. Figure 4.1

illustrates that this research was conducted in six stages: (a) literature review, (b) development of

conceptual model, (c) research design, (d) data collection, (e) data analysis and (f) discussion of

findings and key conclusions.



During stage one, literature review was conducted using secondary sources as well as a few

primary sources, such as reports published by government agencies in Bahrain and the United

Nations. This stage helped in identification of the research problem, gaps and questions, and

research aim and objectives. Moreover, key factors influencing transformation of government and

trust and confidence in government were identified and clarified. Building up on the model

developed by Morgeson et al. (2011) and taking into account the factors mentioned above, a

conceptual model was developed in stage two. Additionally, the research hypotheses were

suggested along with the supporting theories for every defined construct and relationship within

the conceptual model.

In stages three and four, research design including research philosophy, research process,

methodology and mechanisms for data analysis were identified. In brief, since this research

investigates citizens’ perspective, the influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust

and confidence in government, quantitative methodology was adopted. In doing so, an online

survey targeting random ordinary citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain was developed and

distributed. Prior to launching the online survey, a pilot survey was conducted, which involved

testing and validating the conceptual model to ensure that the questions were answerable and the

collected data was reliable.

As for stage five concerning data analysis, SEM was the chosen multivariate technique, which was

found suitable for validating the developed conceptual model. The main purpose behind this was

to validate the fitness of the conceptual model and test the hypotheses by performing CFA and

path analysis.

Finally, in stage six, the findings from data analysis are discussed, theoretical and practical

contributions of this research are presented, limitations and future research directions are

highlighted, and the key conclusions are drawn. The associated chapter for each stage is outlined

in Figure 4.1.



Figure 4.1 Stages of the Research Process



4.4 Research Methodology

There are three common methodologies used for conducting research: qualitative, quantitative and

mixed method (Bryman and Bell, 2007; Creswell, 2003). The process of selecting an appropriate

research method is based on a number of factors, such as the nature of research, problem to be

solved, type of the data needed and accessibility to the data (Punch, 2005). A research may use

one or more research methods (Punch, 2005).

Quantitative method deals with statistics and numbers to explain a phenomenon by normally

testing a theory (Creswell, 2009; Malhotra and Birks, 2007; Zikmund and Babin, 2006). It is

associated with hypotheses, surveys and questionnaires (Bryman, 1992; Denscombe, 2003). In IS

research, quantitative method is used more frequently than the other two methods. Qualitative

method on the other hand, is used to explore and understand a certain phenomenon for developing

a theoretical model (Punch, 2005; Walsham, 2006). Qualitative method is associated with words,

explanations, case studies, interviews and observations (Bryman, 1992; Denscombe, 2003). A

number of researchers such as Denzin and Lincoln (2003) and Myers (1997) pointed out that the

qualitative methodology is more effective as it explores in detail the phenomenon that reflects

reality. Table 4.1. below compares the two methodologies.

Table 4.1 Comparison between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methodologies

Source: Adopted from: Johnson and Christensen (2008) Criteria Qualitative Research Quantitative Research

Purpose To understand and interpret social

interaction

To test hypotheses, look at cause and

effect, and make predictions

Group studied Smaller and not randomly selected Larger and randomly selected

Type of data collected Words, images or objects Specific variables studied

Form of data collected Open-ended responses, interviews,

participant observations, field notes

and reflection

Numbers and statistics

Type of data analysis Identify patterns, features, themes Data based on precise measurements

using structured and validate data-

collection instruments

Most common research

objectives

Explore, discover and construct Describe, explain & predict

Focus Wide-angle lens; examines the breadth

& depth of topic

Narrow-angle lens; tests a very specific

topic

Results Findings that are more generalized and

directional

Findings that are projectable over

population base



The third type is the mixed method approach, which is often called triangulation (Avison et al.,

1999; Bryman and Bell, 2007; Creswell, 2003; Gable, 1994; Jick, 1979). The purpose of using the

mixed method is to use the best of qualitative and quantitative methodologies to understand the

problem better (Burns and Bush, 2006; Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Kaplan and Duchon,

1988; Venkatesh et al., 2013). In practice, it uses techniques of both methods and the sequence of

which method comes first is based on the nature of research problem (Burns and Bush, 2006).

As for this research, quantitative research method has been adopted based on a number of reasons,

as explained here. This research investigates the influence of transformation of government on

citizens’ trust and their confidence in government, which is a phenomenon discussed in this

research through testing a current theory, validating a developed conceptual model and testing

associated hypotheses. This means positivism is the adopted research philosophy, and thus the

research seeks citizens’ perceptions on all constructs and hypotheses proposed in this research.

Since the target audiences for this research are ordinary citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain, the

suitable methodology for capturing a large proportion of the target population is the quantitative

method. The use of quantitative methodology in this research is in line with similar studies

conducted previously in IS research (e.g. Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and

Mossberger, 2006). Qualitative or mixed methodologies are not fitting options for this research, as

it would be impractical to use either of them for the reasons explained above.

4.5 Quantitative Method

With the quantitative method, this research uses survey as a mode of observation or data collection

technique (for reasons specified in the above sections). It is worth pointing out that survey here

refers to a systematic approach for obtaining the needed information from a portion of the targeted

audience; findings of the survey are generalized to cover the entire population (Bhattacherjee,

2012; Groves et al., 2004). The key components that constitute the survey based approach are

explained in the following subsections (Fowler, 2002).

4.5.1 Sampling Process

Sampling refers to obtaining the needed data for a research from a percentage of the targeted

audience or population (Fowler, 2002). It is very important to have the right and appropriate



sample so that findings can be generalized to the overall population (Bhattacherjee, 2012; Sekaran,

2003).

4.5.2 Target Population

Target population can be referred to a target audience or unit of analysis. The target population for

this research is citizens (see section 4.3.2).

4.5.3 Sampling Frame

Sampling Frame can be defined as a full list of all units in the population from which the sample

is drawn (Bryman and Bell, 2007; Churchill and Dawn, 1999; Saunders, 2011). In this context,

the target population or the unit of analysis is citizens, and hence, the sampling frame will comprise

of ordinary citizens living in the Kingdom of Bahrain.

4.5.4 Sampling Technique

As per Bhattacherjee (2012) and Saunders (2011), there are two types of sampling techniques,

which are probability and non-probability; both types have sub-types (Figure 4.2). According to

the probability sampling technique, all units of sampling frame have the probability of being a part

of the sample; non-probability is defined otherwise (Bhattacherjee, 2012; Saunders, 2011). The

selection of appropriate sampling technique is based on the research questions, aim, and objectives;

some studies use a combination of different sampling techniques (Bhattacherjee, 2012; Saunders,

2011).



Figure 4.2 Types of Sampling Techniques

Source: Adopted from: Saunders (2011)

Since this research captures citizens’ perceptions, it adopts probability sampling to ensure that the

target audiences have equal opportunity to be included in the study. As for the sub-type of

probability sampling, random sampling is selected to include as much population in this research.

In order to increase the number of participants, random sampling is normally used in conjunction

with other data collection techniques such as online surveys, postal surveys and/or telephonic

surveys (Saunders, 2011). Since majority of the citizens in Bahrain are well educated and use

Internet regularly, this research uses online random sampling for data collection. Similar

researches conducted previously have used the same sampling technique (Dashti et al., 2009; Nam

and Sayogo, 2011; Weerakkody et al., 2013).

4.5.5 Sample Size

According to the existing literature, there is no definite number agreed by the researchers for a

suitable sample size, as it depends on a number of factors (Fowler, 2002; Muthen and Muthen,

2002). It is preferred to have more samples due to the impact it can have on the accuracy of the

results. The sampling size for this research is 313, which is considered as adequate as per Comrey

and Lee (1992) and Tabachnich and Fidell (2001).



4.5.6 Data Collection Tool

There are two types of data collection tools: interviews and questionnaires; quantitative

methodology often associated with numbers and questionnaires, whereas qualitative method is

more to do with words and interviews (Saunders, 2011). Since this research adopts a quantitative

approach, questionnaires are a suitable data collection tool. Questionnaires contain a number of

questions and the target audiences are expected to answer these questionnaires (Bhattacherjee,

2012). This research employs a structured questionnaire, as it will allow the citizens participating

in the study to select the appropriate answer from the already listed multiple choices.

4.5.7 Types of Questionnaires

Different types of questionnaire are available as shown in Figure 4.3. Self-administrated

questionnaires refer to the prepared questions to be completed by the respondents without any

intervention from the researcher (Saunders, 2011). The sub-types include internet-mediated

questionnaires, postal questionnaires, and delivery and collection questionnaires (Saunders, 2011).

As opposed to the self-administrated questionnaire, the researcher intervenes while conducting

interviewer-administrated questionnaires. For instance, the researcher records respondent’s

answers. This can be done through telephone or via a face-to-face meeting with the responder

(Saunders, 2011).

Figure 4.3 Types of Questionnaires

Source: Adopted from: Saunders (2011)



This research employs self-administrated internet-mediated questionnaires, which can be referred

to as web-based or online questionnaires. The reason for this selection is based on the fact that

majority of citizens in Bahrain are well educated and use Internet regularly. In doing so, a large

number of ordinary citizens from different places in the Kingdom of Bahrain as well as variety of

backgrounds can be captured. Other reasons for selecting this questionnaire type were related to

the time, budget and resource constraints for this research.

The hyperlink to the online questionnaire was distributed to ordinary citizens living in the

Kingdom of Bahrain through emails, SMS and social media (i.e. WhatsApp, Facebook and

LinkedIn). In order to increase the number of participants in this research, respondents were asked

to share the online questionnaire with their contacts. In addition, social media was used to

distribute the online questionnaires as it is extensively used by people, and is also regarded as the

most powerful distribution tool. The use of social media to distribute the online questionnaires

was supported by existing literature (Kayam and Hirsch, 2012; Merolli et al., 2014).

4.6 Questionnaire Development and Validation

4.6.1 Overview

Final version of the questionnaire was developed following a number of phases as illustrated in

table 4.2.; details of each phase are provided in the subsections. All questions were adopted from

previous research (e.g. Abhichandani et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Park and Blenkinsopp,

2011; Parasuraman et al., 1988).

Table 4.2 Questionnaire Development Phases

Phase Number of Questions

1 Pre-Pilot Test 62

2 Pilot Survey 55

3 Main Survey 51

The final questionnaire targeting citizens living in the Kingdom of Bahrain comprised of fifty-one

close-ended questions and four multiple-choice questions with single answers. The four multiple-

choice questions related to demographic variables: gender, age, educational level and income.

Taking into account the sensitivity of this research in a small country that is surrounded

geographically by many political issues, a 7-point Likert scale was selected for the fifty-one close-



ended questions for the purposes of increasing the number of choices and avoiding the selection

of the “neutral” choice as much as possible (Bhattacherjee, 2012).

The language used in the questionnaire is clear and easy to understand to facilitate ease of

completing the questions (Bhattacherjee, 2012). Potential respondents were asked to select the best

option as they see appropriate based on their perception of all constructs of the conceptual model.

The questionnaire refrained from any information related to respondent identity, confirming that

the information provided would only be used for the purpose of this research, and will be kept

strictly confidential.

For the pilot survey, 71 responses were received, out of which only 48 were found complete. As

for the main survey, 513 responses were received, out of which only 313 were found complete.

Since majority of the citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain are well educated and English is the

second language of the country, it is used heavily in both public and private sectors. The

questionnaire was thus in English and was not translated to Arabic. This selection was confirmed

by a number of respondents, who were of different ages as shown in Chapter 5.

4.6.2 Structure of the Questionnaire

This research employed a structured questionnaire with choices to be selected from by the

respondents. The questionnaire contained three sections: welcome page, demographic questions

and close-ended questions. The welcome page stated the purpose of the questionnaire and the aim

and objectives of the research. In addition, the potential respondents were assured of

confidentiality. The second section contained four multiple-choice questions with single answers

related to the demographic variables: gender, age, educational level and income. The third section

contained fifty-one questions with a 7-point Likert scale, covering all nine constructs of the

conceptual model. The multiple-choice questions and close-ended 7-point Likert scale questions

can be referred to as nominal responses and interval-level responses (Bhattacherjee, 2012).

4.6.3 Pre-Test

The initial version of the questionnaire consisted of 62 questions adopted from previous research.

However, before launching the pilot and main surveys, it was important to conduct a pre-test to



ensure that the questionnaire was relevant, not repetitive, easy, clear, and understandable (Burns

and Bush, 2002; Fowler, 2002). For these reasons, two academics (Ph.D scholars), reviewed the

content of the initial questionnaire that resulted in deleting seven questions, editing a few questions

and improving the language and grammar for a number of questions.

4.6.4 Pilot Survey

Before launching the main survey, a pilot test was carried out in September 2015. Survey Monkey

was the website used to publish the online questionnaire. The hyperlink to the survey was

communicated via email, SMS and social media applications (WhatsApp, Facebook, and

LinkedIn). Table 4.3 illustrates the measuring items for each construct, and the supporting

evidence from literature. All 55 questions have been recorded in Appendix 1.

Table 4.3 Research Questions and Evidence from the Literature

Construct Measuring Items

(See appendix 1) Adopted From

E-Government (EGOV) Q1-Q10 Abhichandani et al. (2005)

Transparency (TRANSPY) Q11-Q15 Park and Blenkinsopp (2011)

Accountability (ACOUNT) Q16-Q20 Said et al. (2015)

Technology (TECH) Q21-Q23 Hameed and Al-Shawabkah (2013)

Expectation (EXPEC) Q24-Q36 Parasuraman et al. (1988)

Transformation (TRANSF) Q37-Q41 Patterson et al. (2005)

Performance (PERFO) Q42-Q45 Zhang (2013)

Satisfaction (SATISF) Q46-Q50 Zhang (2013)

Trust and Confidence (TRU_COF) Q51-Q55 McKnight et al. (2002); Morgeson et al. (2011)

Following the distribution of the online survey, a total of 71 responses were received; only 48

responses were considered as complete while the remaining 23 were treated incomplete and not

used for analysis purposes. These 48 responses represented a completion rate of 68%, which is an

acceptable rate (Baruch, 1999; Dommeyer et al., 2004; Ogier, 2005). The 68% completion rate

could be attributed to the length of the survey, which ran up to 55 questions in total.

Moving to the analysis, validity and reliability tests of the conceptual model was conducted using

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23.0. The minimum and maximum

values (mentioned below) were derived from literature on research methodology (Robinson et al.,

1991a; Sekaran, 2000). Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the reliability. Alpha values at 0.7

were considered acceptable, exceeding 0.7 were considered good, while those below 0.7 were

considered poor (Sekaran, 2000). On the other hand, the internal consistency measure was adopted



for measuring validity; specifically, inter-item correlation and item to total correlation for each

construct were measured. Minimum correlation value was set as acceptable at 0.3, and the

maximum was set at 0.8 for inter-item correlation, whereas, minimum correlation value was set as

acceptable at 0.5 for item to total correlation (Robinson et al.,1991a). Where an item(s) was found

to cause concern depending on how close the statistical value of the measure was to the acceptable

value, and how many items would remain, if an item(s) were deleted, the criterion to decide

whether to retain or delete the item(s) was used to measure a construct (Mahmood and

Weerakkody, 2016).

Summary of the reliability and validity analyses are shown in table 4.4. (before deleting any

questions). It can be seen that constructs 1 and 5, EGOV and EXPEC, have issues with validity

(table 4.4). Furthermore, constructs 2 and 3, TRANSPY and ACOUNT, have serious issues with

both reliability and validity (table 4.4). Moving forward, removing Q14, Q17, Q29 and Q33 from

the main survey resulted in improving the values significantly for reliability and validity (table

4.5). As for construct 1, EGOV, Q7 was retained for the main survey, as values for Item-to-Item

and Item-to-total were expected to change with the larger sample size.

Surprisingly, the five questions mentioned above were the negative questions used in the

questionnaire. The main reason for using such questions was to force respondents to consider

properly the questions and reduce biases as much as possible. It is believed that respondents may

not understood the five negative questions, which resulted in having issues with validly and/or

reliability measures of the associated constructs.



Table 4.4 Summary of reliability and validity analyses (before deleting questions)

No. Construct Question

codes

Cronbach's

Alpha

Item-item

correlation

(range)

Item-total

correlation

(range)

Remarks

1 EGOV Q1-Q10 0.817 -0.328 to

0.749 -0.3 to 0.725

Reliability is good, but inter-item and item-to-total correlation are found to range from poor

to good, with item Q7 causing some correlation concerns. This item will be retained for the

main survey to test its behavior with a larger sample size.

2 TRANSPY Q11-Q15 0.352 -0.519 to

0.681

-0.580 to

0.605

Reliability, inter-item correlation and item-to-total correlation are not good, with Q14

causing serious problems. This item will be deleted as it is contributing to significant error

to the reliability, inter item correlation and item to total correlation. Reliability, inter-item

correlation and item-to-total correlation are unlikely to change even if the sample size is

increased.

3 ACOUNT Q16-Q20 0.617 -0.342 to

0.604

-0.084 to

0.679

Reliability is poor. Inter-item and item-to-total correlation ranges from poor to good, with

item Q17 causing serious problems. This item will be deleted as it is contributing to

significant error to the reliability, inter item correlation and item to total correlation.

Reliability, inter-item correlation and item-to-total correlation are unlikely to change even if

the sample size is increased.

4 TECH Q21-Q23 0.744 0.358 to

0.629

0.473 to

0.678

Reliability is good. Inter-item and item-to-total correlation range from acceptable to good.

Item-to-total correlation for Q23 is slightly lower than the acceptable level of 0.5 and it is

expected to improve with sample size. Hence retained to be part of the main survey

questionnaire.

5 EXPEC Q24-36 0.902 -0.353 to

0.822

0.006 to

0.859

Reliability is good, but inter-item and item-to-total correlation values are found to range

from poor to good, with items Q29 and Q33 causing some concern with correlation. These

items will be deleted as they are unlikely to improve in value even if the sample size is

increased.

6 TRANSF Q37-Q41 0.915 0.584 to

0.816 0.73 to 0.836

Reliability, inter-item correlation and item-to-total correlation are found to be good. All

items will be retained for main survey.

7 PERFO Q41-Q45 0.887 0.558 to

0.771

0.705 to

0.815



8 SATISF Q46-Q50 0.927 0.429 to

0.835

0.708 to

0.907



9 TRUST &

CONFIDENCE Q51-Q55 0.903

0.511 to

0.819

0.659 to

0.838





After deleting Q14, Q17, Q29 and Q33, reliability and validity tests were conducted again, which resulted in data shown in table 4.5.

Table 4.5 Summary of reliability and validity analyses (after deleting Q14, Q17, Q29 and Q33)


codes

Cronbach's

Alpha

Item-item

correlation

(range)

Item-total

correlation

(range)

Remarks

1 EGOV Q1-Q10 0.817 -0.328 to

0.749 -0.3 to 0.725

Reliability is good, but inter-item and item-to-total correlations are found to range from poor

to good, with item Q7 causing some correlation concerns. This item will be retained for the

main survey to test its behavior with a larger sample size.

2 TRANSPY Q11-Q13

0.816 0.310 to

0.681

0.520 to

0.740 After deleting Q14, reliability, inter-item and item-to-total correlations are found to be good.

Q15

3 ACOUNT Q16,

Q18-Q20 0.778

0.377 to

0.604

0.499 to

0.645

Reliability, inter-item and item-to-total correlations are found to be good. All items will be

retained except Q17. Deleting Q17 still left four items to measure the construct, and hence

causes no concern to the adequacy of the number of items needed to measure a construct.

4 TECH Q21-Q23 0.744 0.358 to

0.629

0.473 to

0.678

Reliability value is good. Inter-item and item-to-total correlations range from acceptable to

good. Item-to-total correlation for Q23 is slightly lower than the acceptable 0.5, but is

expected to improve with sample size. Hence, it is retained in the main survey

5 EXPEC

Q24-

Q28,

Q30-

Q32,

Q34-36

0.943 0.284 to

0.822

0.564 to

0.870

Reliability, inter-item and item-to-total correlations are found to be good. All items will be

retained except Q29 and Q33. Even though one correlation value between Q25 and Q30 is

showing slightly less than the acceptable value of 0.3 for inter-item correlation, as it is very

close to 0.3, it is accepted with the assumption that when sample size increases, correlation

will improve. Deleting Q29 and Q33 meant still eleven items were left to measure the

construct and hence, there was no cause of concern to the adequacy of the number of items

needed to measure a construct.

6 TRANSF Q37-Q41 0.915 0.584 to

0.816 0.73 to 0.836



7 PERFO Q41-Q45 0.887 0.558 to

0.771

0.705 to

0.815



8 SATISF Q46-Q50 0.927 0.429 to

0.835

0.708 to

0.907



9 TRUST &

CONFIDENCE Q51-Q55 0.903

0.511 to

0.819

0.659 to

0.838





4.6.5 Main Survey

The main survey comprised of 51 questions (See Appendix 2 and Table 4.6) and was carried out

between October 2015 and November 2015 using the same methodology adopted for the pilot

study.

Table 4.6 Main Survey - Research Questions


EGOV Q1-Q10

TRANSPY Q11-Q14

ACOUNT Q15-Q18

TECH Q19-Q21

EXPEC Q22-Q32

TRANSF Q33-Q37

PERFO Q38-Q41

SATISF Q42-Q46

TRU_ COF Q47-Q51

It is believed that the hyperlink to the web survey reached around 1000 people living in the

Kingdom of Bahrain. In total 513 survey responses were received, out of which only 313 responses

were deemed complete. The 513 responses represented a completion rate of 51%, which is

considered a good response rate in Information System research (Fowler, 2002). As per Comrey

and Lee (1992) and Tabachnich and Fidell (2001), the 313 received responses is considered an

adequate sampling size.

Despite Q7 for EGOV causing some problems with Item-to-Item and Item-to-total correlations

(section 4.6.4), it was retained in the main survey for when the sample size would be increased

(Halkett and Kristjanson, 2007; Javali et al., 2011). Following the main survey, validity and

reliability for EGOV were revisited using the same parameters identified in section 4.6.4 for

validity and reliability tests. Table 4.6 confirms that regardless of the increased sample size, Q7

still caused issues with the validity test. Ultimately, deleting Q7 improved values for validity and

reliability (table 4.7).



Table 4.6. Summary of the reliability and validity analysis for EGOV (before deleting Q7)


codes

Cronbach's

Alpha

Item-item

correlation (range)

Item-total

correlation (range) Remarks

1 EGOV Q1-Q10 0.858 -0.160 to 0.725 -0.271 to 0.760

Reliability is good. However, inter item and item to total correlation are found

to range from poor to good, with item Q7 contributing again to this regardless

of Increasing the sample size.

Table 4.7 Summary of the reliability and validity analysis for EGOV (following deleting Q7)


codes

Cronbach's

Alpha

Item-item

correlation (range)

Item-total

correlation (range) Remarks

1 EGOV Q1-Q6

Q8-Q10 0.904 0.312 to 0.725 0.540 to 0.760 Reliability and validity values are good following deletion of Q7.

Therefore, only the 50 questions listed in Appendix 3 were considered, and subject to further data analysis (see chapter 5).



4.7 Data Analysis

Before selecting the suitable data analysis technique, it is important to consider a number of

elements such as preparing, inputting and checking the data; this includes the type of data, data

layout, coding, entering data and checking for errors (Churchil and Lacobucci, 2004; Saunders,

2011; Sekaran, 2000). The data type used for this research was nominal responses and interval-

level responses as highlighted in section 4.6.2. Since this research uses online survey, the other

three items, data layout, coding, entering and checking data for errors, were accomplished

automatically by the system that run the online survey.

SPSS version 23.0 was used in this research for the data analysis purposes as it is easy to use,

flexible, effective in data management, better in organizing output, quick in analyzing data, and

includes a number of options such as graphs, charts and modeling (Field, 2013; Green and Salkind,

2010; Pallant, 2013). The data was collected through an online survey by the system that run it and

was directly exported to an SPSS file, which did not require any coding of responses and

cleaning/checking data for errors. The use of online survey and the system running it saved a lot

of time and effort as well as avoided common errors and mistakes made with using a manual

approach.

Taking into account the research questions, aim, and objectives, SEM was chosen as a multivariate

statistical analysis technique that analyzes structural relationships between variables (Gefen et al.,

2000; Hooper, 2008; Schreiber et al., 2006; Schumacker and Lomax, 2004). In this research, there

are variables (Transformation of Government), which act as dependent in one instance and

independent on another occasion. Thus, SEM fits properly with the developed conceptual model.

Additionally, SEM is used to validate the fitness of the conceptual model, and to test the

hypotheses by performing CFA and path analysis (Hair et al., 2006). The tool used for performing

CFA and path analysis is Analysis of Moment Structure (AMOS) version 23.0, which is an added

SPSS module that includes a graphical interface making it an easy tool for data analysis (Arbuckle

and Wothke, 1999; Blunch, 2012; Byrne, 2016). Chapter 5 will elaborate on the data analysis

elements of this research.



4.8 Research Ethics

Since this research collected primary data from ordinary citizens living in the Kingdom of Bahrain,

it was necessary to obtain an ethics approval before doing so. As per Brunel University’s Code of

Research Ethics, the ethical approval was obtained (See Appendix 5) following successful

submission of the application for research ethics approval. The ultimate goal of such ethics

approval is to ensure that the research is conducted in a professional and ethical manner whilst

respecting rights of the participants.

In the submitted application for research ethics approval, the research problem, questions, aim,

and objectives were mentioned, along with details of research methodology, target audience,

sampling technique, data collection tool, type of questionnaire and mode of questionnaire

distribution in the Kingdom of Bahrain.

4.9 Chapter Summary

This chapter provides an overview of the suitable methodology and related research techniques

adopted for this research. It starts with justifying the reasons for selecting positivist research

philosophy compared to interpretive and critical research. Then, it moves to the research purpose

where justifications are outlined for the selection of explanatory research. The research process

across six phases is then explained. As for research methodology, the reasons for selecting

quantitative approach are identified. Justifications for the use of online survey are provided.

Different elements of the sampling process such as target population, sampling frame, sampling

technique and sampling size are also discussed.

The structure and other elements of the questionnaire as well as the process followed for

questionnaire development and validation are highlighted, including information on pre-test, pilot

test and the main survey. Justifications for the selection of SEM and AMOS for data analysis are

also offered. The chapter concludes with information on research ethics approval that was

successfully obtained prior to data collection. The next chapter presents the data analysis process

and findings from CFA and path analysis.

Chapter 5: Data Analysis


CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS



Chapter 5 : Data Analysis

5.1 Introduction

Chapter 4 covered the research design, including research philosophy, research process,

methodology and mechanisms for data analysis. The chapter uses quantitative research method by

distributing an online survey to the citizens of Kingdom of Bahrain for investigating the influence

of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government. It also presents

findings from the different tests performed on the collected data.

Taking into account the research methodology explained in chapter 4, SEM was chosen as the

multivariate technique to validate the fitness of the proposed conceptual model. Before performing

CFA and path analysis, a number of tests were conducted to clean the data, which included

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), reliability and validity of the research instrument, correlation

and normality of the data distribution.

This chapter is structured as follows. Sections 5.2 and 5.3 present response rate and profile of the

respondents, respectively. Results of EFA are presented in section 5.4, and validity and reliability

of research instrument is covered in section 5.5. Descriptive statistics are presented in section 5.6.

Correlation and normality assessments are included in sections 5.7 and 5.8, respectively. Analyses

conducted under SEM, including CFA and path analysis, are presented in sections 5.9, 5.10 and

5.11, respectively. Mediation effects including total, direct and indirect effects are included in

section 5.12. Section 5.13 then summarizes the chapter.

5.2 Response Rate and Sampling Size

This research uses an online survey comprising of 51 questions that was distributed between

October 2015 and November 2015 using email, SMS and social media to the citizens of the

Kingdom of Bahrain. Of the total 513 received responses, only 313 were complete and usable for

this research. In dealing with missing values, mean was used as a substitution (Pigott, 2001).

However, the use of mean created problems with the normality tests (Skewness & Kurtosis,

Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) and Shapiro-Wilk (S-W)) and values of the correlation matrix. To fix

this problem, all 200 responses with missing values were discarded (Pigott, 2001). Therefore, the



total number of responses considered in this research was 313 that resulted in achieving better

values for normality tests and correlation matrix. Additionally, the fitness of the model and validity

results also improved.

Taking into account the researchers’ wide network of contacts in the Kingdom of Bahrain, it is

believed that the online web survey reached about 1000 people altogether. Thus, the response rate

in this case is 51%, which is considered a good response rate in Information System research

(Fowler, 2002). As per Comrey and Lee (1992) and Tabachnich and Fidell (2001), the 313 received

responses is considered as an adequate sampling size.

5.3 Respondent Profile

The online survey included demographic questions such as gender, age, educational level and

income. The profile of respondents is illustrated in table 5.1, which confirms that no significant

gender or age bias was present. As for education level and income, it can be noticed that a large

proportion of the respondents were highly educated and well paid.

Table 5.1 Profile of the Respondents

5.4 Factor Analysis

Factor analysis is a statistical method used to verify construct validity and to explain correlation

between variables; it can be conducted using EFA and CFA. Practically, it groups variables based

on significant correlation (Henson and Roberts, 2006; Thompson, 2004; Williams et al., 2010).

Gender Frequency

(%) Age

Frequency

(%) Education

Frequency

(%) Income

Frequency

(%)

Male 195 (62.3) <18 3 (1.0)

Less than

secondary

school 0 (0) Under US$500 78 (24.9)

Female 118 (37.7) 18-30 142 (45.4)

Secondary

school 11 (3.5)

US$500/- to

US$1,000/- 22 (7)

31-40 90 (28.8) Diploma 22 (7.0)

US$1,000/- to

US$1,500/- 21 (6.7)

41-50 45 (14.4)

Bachelor’s

degree 184 (58.8)

US$1,500/- to

US$2,000/- 22 (7)

>50 33 (10.5)

Master’s

degree 96 (30.7)

More than

US$2,000/- 170 (54.4)

Total 313



According to the existing literature, EFA can be used followed by CFA for the purpose of

identifying potential problems with variables early in the process, and thus preparing variables for

a cleaner SEM phase (Cabrera-Nguyen, 2010; Worthington and Whittaker, 2006). This research

thus uses EFA to spot early in the process any potential problems with the variables, so that CFA

using SEM can be conducted smoothly.

About 50 questions as listed in Appendix 3 were identified in Chapter 4, which were to be subject

to data analysis. After running the factor analysis in SPSS 23.0, three questions (Q7, Q8 and Q9)

out of the nine for the EGOV construct were eliminated as they were loading on a different factor.

Apart from the above, factor analysis results were satisfactory. Accordingly, the final number of

questions is 47, as listed in Appendix 4.

5.5 Reliability and Validity Analysis

In order to ensure the consistency and accuracy of this research, it is essential to conduct reliability

and validity tests of the research instrument. Minimum and maximum values proposed for both

reliability and validity are illustrated in Table 5.2 (see section 4.6.4).

Table 5.2 Values for Reliability and Validity Assessment

Measuring Tool Recommended Value References

Reliability Cronbach's alpha

Value= 0.7: Acceptable

Value> 0.7: Good

Value< 0.7: Poor

(Sekaran,2000)

Validity Inter-item correlation

Minimum = 0.3

Maximum = 0.8 (Robinson et

al.,1991a) Item to total correlation Maximum = 0.5

Results of the reliability and validity analyses carried out on the 47 questions are shown in table

5.3 below. The values of Cronbach's alpha, Inter-item correlation and Item-to total correlation are

exceeding 0.7, 0.3 and 0.5, respectively. Therefore, it can be concluded that the research instrument

is valid and reliable.



Table 5.3 Reliability and Validity Assessment


#

#

Items N

Cronbach's

Alpha

Item-item

correlation

(range)

Item-total

correlation

(range)

Remarks

1 EGOV Q1-Q6 6 313 0.892 0.425 to

0.733

0.573 to

0.803

Reliability, inter item correlation and

item to total correlation are good.

2 TRANSPY Q11-Q13 4 313 0.844 0.501 to

0.620

0.629 to

0.705



3 ACOUNT Q14-Q17 4 313 0.861 0.535 to

0.695

0.644 to

0.768



4 TECH Q18-Q20 3 313 0.793 0.532 to

0.589 0.616 to

9.658 Reliability, inter item correlation and


5 EXPEC Q21 - Q31 11 313 0.946 0.551 to

0.761 0.712 to

0.798 Reliability, inter item correlation and


6 TRANSF Q32- Q36 5 313 0.927 0.640 to

0.779

0.756 to

827



7 PERFO Q37-Q40 4 313 0.899 0.629 to

0.742

0.733 to

0.793



8 SATISF Q41- Q45 5 313 0.932 0.657 to

0.785

0.787 to

0.837



9 TRUST &

CONFIDENCE Q46-Q50 5 313 0.934

0.679 to

0.832

0.757 to

0.864



Legend: N= Sample Size

5.6 Descriptive Statistics

Table 5.4 presents the mean and standard deviation for all items of the nine constructs included in

this research. In this table, the 47 questions are coded to clearly link each question with its

construct. Moreover, the coding helps in organizing the data and assists in the analysis phase.

Table 5.4 Descriptive Statistics

Construct Item Code N Mean Std. Deviation

EGOV

Q1 EGOV1 313 4.3479 1.55301

Q2 EGOV2 313 4.4335 1.51929

Q3 EGOV3 313 4.4045 1.48574

Q4 EGOV4 313 4.0668 1.49645

Q5 EGOV5 313 4.1229 1.47682

Q6 EGOV6 313 4.0369 1.55930

TRANSPY Q7 TRANSPY1 313 3.8875 1.43689

Q8 TRANSPY2 313 3.6497 1.48583



Q9 TRANSPY3 313 3.6126 1.62085

Q10 TRANSPY4 313 4.0077 1.40967

ACOUNT

Q11 ACOUNT1 313 4.1132 1.48731

Q12 ACOUNT2 313 3.8680 1.56146

Q13 ACOUNT3 313 3.8883 1.45463

Q14 ACOUNT4 313 3.6598 1.46090

TECH

Q15 TECH1 313 4.2480 1.58759

Q16 TECH2 313 4.5605 1.48544

Q17 TECH3 313 4.0329 1.58283

EXPEC

Q18 EXPEC1 313 3.8442 1.50819

Q19 EXPEC2 313 3.8777 1.59373

Q20 EXPEC3 313 3.6391 1.55421

Q21 EXPEC4 313 3.9777 1.50304

Q22 EXPEC5 313 3.8983 1.49767

Q23 EXPEC6 313 3.7913 1.48265

Q24 EXPEC7 313 3.9138 1.47170

Q25 EXPEC8 313 4.3646 1.54830

Q26 EXPEC9 313 3.9770 1.50729

Q27 EXPEC10 313 3.7247 1.58133

Q28 EXPEC11 313 3.7581 1.59462

TRANSF

Q29 TRANSF1 313 3.5756 1.55843

Q30 TRANSF2 313 3.6028 1.58955

Q31 TRANSF3 313 3.4431 1.53438

Q32 TRANSF4 313 3.3967 1.60360

Q33 TRANSF5 313 3.6119 1.61094

PERFO

Q34 PERFO1 313 4.0995 1.52440

Q35 PERFO2 313 4.2621 1.52997

Q36 PERFO3 313 4.0332 1.48677

Q37 PERFO4 313 4.2323 1.50616

SATISF

Q38 SATISF1 313 4.2624 1.52998

Q39 SATISF2 313 4.3084 1.51315

Q40 SATISF3 313 4.2522 1.50520

Q41 SATISF4 313 4.3521 1.47718

Q42 SATISF5 313 4.4011 1.48337

TRU_COF

Q43 TRU_COF1 313 4.1527 1.54318

Q44 TRU_COF2 313 4.1094 1.52058

Q45 TRU_COF3 313 4.0762 1.60653

Q46 TRU_COF4 313 4.0261 1.58295

Q47 TRU_COF5 313 4.2579 1.62695

Values for mean ranged from 3.39 to 4.56 (where 1 = minimum, and 7 = maximum), which indicate

that responses were between neither disagree nor agree to agree. This means that the respondents



were not very impressed with the government services provided in the Kingdom of Bahrain. The

respondents showed agreement for all items of e-government, technology, performance,

satisfaction, and trust and confidence. On the other hand, they showed less agreement with items

of transparency, accountability, citizen expectations and transformation of government.

5.7 Correlation Matrix

In order to describe the degree of relationships between the variables of this research, a correlation

matrix is used. Table 5.5 presents the correlation matrix, which also includes the mean and standard

deviation. It is clear from table 5.5 that there is significant correlation (Bartko, 1966; Lee Rodgers

and Nicewander, 1988; Taylor, 1990) amongst the variables, with the values ranging from 0.566

to 0.860.

Table 5.5 Mean, Std. Deviation and Correlation

Note: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001

5.8 Normality of the Data

In order to validate the normality of the data distribution, skewness and kurtosis test was performed

(Hair et al., 2006). Skewness refers to the symmetry of the distribution, while Kurtosis refers to

the degree to which the data distribution is peaked (Pallant, 2010). The parameters for measuring

skewness and kurtosis are illustrated in table 5.6.

Table 5.6 Parameters for skewness and kurtosis

Positive Form Negative Form Acceptable

Range References

Skewness Distribution is shifted

to the left

Distribution is shifted

to the right +1.5 to -1.5 Li (1999); Pallant (2010)

Kurtosis Flat distribution of data Peaked distribution of

data +3 to -3 Li (1999); Pallant (2010)

Mean Std. Deviation EGOV TRANSPY ACOUNT TECH EXPEC TRANSF PERFO

EGOV 37.0224 10.66008

TRANSPY 15.2115 4.9846 .786**

ACOUNT 15.609 5.07264 .744** .761**

TECH 12.8494 3.95403 .707** .698** .758**

EXPEC 42.8109 13.61511 .731** .748** .794** .748**

TRANSF 17.5641 7.02849 .566** .678** .691** .587** .787**

PERFO 16.6603 5.35652 .722** .691** .689** .672** .756** .602**

SATISF 21.6667 6.7338 .709** .670** .662** .667** .759** .553** .860**



Table 5.7 illustrates results from the skewness and kurtosis test, which indicates that no item

skewness exceeded ±1.5 and no kurtosis value exceeded ±3.0. As such, the distribution of data is

considered normal.

Table 5.7 Results of skewness and kurtosis test

N Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error

EGOV Q1 - Q6 313 37.0224 10.66008 -.047 .138 -.575 .275

TRANSPY Q10 - Q13 313 15.2115 4.98460 .207 .138 -.292 .275

ACOUNT Q14 - Q17 313 15.6090 5.07264 -.020 .138 -.416 .275

TECH Q18 - Q20 313 12.8494 3.95403 -.031 .138 -.318 .275

EXPEC Q21 - Q31 313 42.8109 13.61511 .053 .138 -.268 .275

TRANSF Q32 - Q36 313 17.5641 7.02849 .156 .138 -.643 .275

PERFO Q37 - Q40 313 16.6603 5.35652 -.113 .138 -.484 .275

SATISF Q41 - Q45 313 21.6667 6.73380 -.182 .138 -.348 .275

Valid N (listwise) 313

5.9 Structural Equation Modelling

This research adopts SEM as the multivariate statistical analysis technique that combines EFA and

multiple regression. It analyzes the structural relationships between variables included in this

research through performing CFA and path analysis (Hair et al., 2006). SEM has two models, the

measurement model, and the structural model; the measurement model investigates the

relationships between observed (measured) and latent variables, whereas the structural model

investigates the relationships between latent variables only (Suhr, 2006).

5.10 Confirmatory Factor Analysis

5.10.1 Measurement Model Fit

CFA was conducted using AMOS to test the measurement model. Before presenting the results of

CFA, it is important to point out that the model fit is measured using a number of fit indices such

as Chi-square, Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Degree of Freedom (DF), Comparative Fit Index

(CFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Incremental Fit Index (IFI), Relative Fit Index (RFI), Tucker-

Lewis Index (TLI), Root Mean Square Residual (RMR) and Root Mean Square Error of

Approximation (RMSEA) (Schreiber et al., 2006; Hair et al., 2009). However, there is no common

set of agreed fit indices to be reported (Jackson et al., 2009) and the same applies to the acceptable

values for fit indices (Hair et al., 2009; Schreiber et al., 2006). Park (2008) on the other hand,

suggests reporting at least one of the fit indices.



This research reports seven fit indices as listed in table 5.8, which have been often reported at

many instances by different studies (Hooper, 2008; Iacobucci, 2010).

Table 5.8 Recommended Levels for Fit Indices

Fit indices Recommended

Value References

Chi-square test statistic CMIN/ df 1.00~3.00 Lee et al. (2015)

Goodness-of fit index (GFI) >0.80 Lee et al. (2015)

Root mean square error of app. (RMSEA) <0.08 Lee et al. (2015)

Root mean squared residual (RMR) <0.05 Lee et al. (2015)

Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) >0.90 Hu and Bentler,

(1998;1999)

Comparative Fit Index (CFI) >0.90 Hu and Bentler,

(1998;1999)

Incremental Fit Index (IFI) >0.90 Hu and Bentler,

(1998;1999)

Performing CFA resulted in the following values for CMIN/DF, RMSEA, TLI, CFI and IFI (Table

5.9), which were found to be in line with the recommended values. Furthermore, GFI at 0.786 was

very close to the recommended value of 0.8, but RMR at 0.101 did not meet its recommended

value of 0.05.

Table 5.9 Values for Fit Indices

Fit indices Recommende

d Value Structural Model

Chi-square test statistic (χ2)/ df 1.00~3.00 1997.084/991=2.015

Goodness-of fit index (GFI) >0.80 0.786

Root mean square error of app. (RMSEA) <0.08 0.057

Root mean squared residual (RMR) <0.05 0.101

Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) >0.90 0.916

Comparative Fit Index (CFI) >0.90 0.923

Incremental Fit Index (IFI) >0.90 0.923

Of the seven fit indices suggested, five fit indices were found acceptable and one that is GFI was

very close to the acceptable value. Therefore, CFA for the proposed model resulted in a good fit.



5.10.2 Standardized Loadings, Critical Ratios and R Squares

The next step is to present standardized loadings, Critical Ratios (CR) and R Square (Squared

Multiple Correlations, SMC) for all items of the measurement model. The acceptable values for

each are illustrated in table 5.10.

Table 5.10 Recommended Values for Standardized loadings, C.R, SMC

Parameters Recommended Value References

Standardized loadings >0.5 Hair et al. (2010)

Critical Rations (C.R) > ± 1.96 (p < 0.001) Hox and Bechger (1998)

R square (SMC) <=0.9 Field (2006) and Tabchnick and Fidell (2006)

As shown in table 5.11, all values of standardized loadings (Standardized Regression Weights,

S.R.W) are greater than 0.5. The C.R. values are above ± 1.96 (p < 0.001). As for the SMC values,

all values are below 0.9.

Table 5.11 Values for Standardized loadings, C.R, SMC

Structural Relation R.W. S.E. C.R. S.R.W SMC

ACOUNT1 cACOUNT 1.204 0.071 17.035 0.811 0.657

ACOUNT2 cACOUNT 1.253 0.075 16.819 0.804 0.646

ACOUNT3 cACOUNT 1.15 0.07 16.447 0.792 0.627

ACOUNT4 cACOUNT 1.039 0.073 14.174 0.713 0.508

EGOV1 cEGOV 0.927 0.083 11.199 0.598 0.357

EGOV2 cEGOV 1.294 0.07 18.455 0.853 0.728

EGOV3 cEGOV 1.197 0.071 16.768 0.808 0.653

EGOV4 cEGOV 1.166 0.072 16.115 0.781 0.609

EGOV5 cEGOV 1.202 0.071 17.042 0.815 0.664

EGOV6 cEGOV 1.156 0.077 14.999 0.742 0.551

EXPEC1 cEXPEC 1.162 0.072 16.047 0.772 0.596

EXPEC10 cEXPEC 1.232 0.076 16.301 0.781 0.609

EXPEC11 cEXPEC 1.255 0.076 16.544 0.789 0.622

EXPEC2 cEXPEC 1.249 0.076 16.455 0.785 0.616

EXPEC3 cEXPEC 1.182 0.075 15.747 0.762 0.58

EXPEC4 cEXPEC 1.167 0.072 16.235 0.778 0.605

EXPEC5 cEXPEC 1.203 0.071 17.06 0.804 0.647

EXPEC6 cEXPEC 1.215 0.069 17.579 0.821 0.673

EXPEC7 cEXPEC 1.19 0.069 17.242 0.81 0.656

EXPEC8 cEXPEC 1.144 0.076 15.113 0.74 0.547

EXPEC9 cEXPEC 1.162 0.072 16.04 0.772 0.596

PERFO1 cPERFO 1.263 0.071 17.761 0.83 0.688

PERFO2 cPERFO 1.294 0.071 18.345 0.847 0.717

PERFO3 cPERFO 1.166 0.071 16.359 0.786 0.617

PERFO4 cPERFO 1.293 0.069 18.788 0.86 0.739

SATISF1 cSATISF 1.341 0.069 19.55 0.878 0.771

SATISF2 cSATISF 1.318 0.068 19.335 0.872 0.761

SATISF3 cSATISF 1.278 0.069 18.543 0.85 0.723



SATISF4 cSATISF 1.186 0.07 17.007 0.804 0.646

SATISF5 cSATISF 1.294 0.067 19.389 0.874 0.764

TECH1 cTECH 1.122 0.082 13.68 0.708 0.501

TECH2 cTECH 1.011 0.078 13.026 0.681 0.464

TECH3 cTECH 1.249 0.079 15.884 0.79 0.624

TRANSF1 cTRANSF 1.265 0.074 17.191 0.813 0.661

TRANSF2 cTRANSF 1.397 0.072 19.498 0.88 0.775

TRANSF3 cTRANSF 1.314 0.07 18.693 0.858 0.736

TRANSF4 cTRANSF 1.343 0.075 17.988 0.839 0.703

TRANSF5 cTRANSF 1.327 0.076 17.527 0.825 0.681

TRANSPY1 cTRANSPY 1.134 0.07 16.254 0.79 0.625




TRU_COF1 cTRU_COF 1.22 0.073 16.619 0.792 0.627

TRU_COF2 cTRU_COF 1.263 0.071 17.901 0.832 0.692

TRU_COF3 cTRU_COF 1.452 0.071 20.557 0.905 0.819

TRU_COF4 cTRU_COF 1.418 0.07 20.24 0.897 0.805

TRU_COF5 cTRU_COF 1.436 0.073 19.748 0.884 0.781

Legend: R.W: Regression weight, S.E: Standard error, C.R: Critical ratio, S.R.W: Standardized regression Weights, S.M.C: Squared multiple correlation.

Based on the above results, construct validity can be assessed. Before doing so, the measurement

model is presented below.



Figure 5.1 Measurement Model



5.10.3 Construct Validity Assessment

Construct validity refers to the ability of indicators or measures of a construct to measure what

they are designed for (Brown, 1996; Hair et al., 2010; Zikmund, 2003). Convergent validity is

used in this research to measure construct validity (Hair et al., 2010). Convergent validity refers

to reaching same results from performing a number of different methods on the same construct

(Hair et al., 2010; Venkatraman and Grant, 1986). Convergent validity can be examined using

standardized loadings, Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Composite Reliability (CR).

Acceptable value for standardized loading has been discussed in section 5.10.2, whereas the

acceptable values for AVE and CR are shown in table 5.12.

Table 5.12 Recommended Values for AVE and CR

Parameters Recommended

Value References

Average Variance Extracted (AVE) >= 0.5 Fornell and Larcker (1981); Hair et al. (2010)

Composite Reliability (CR) >= 0.7 Nunnally and Bernstein (1994)

The CR and AVE values are computed using formulae suggested in the literature (Fornell and

Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2010). However, this research uses ready tools for calculating these

values to avoid any human error. To confirm correctness, a number of different tools and

calculators were used, which computed the same CR and AVE values (Table 5.13). The CR and

AVE values are higher than 0.7 and 0.5, respectively, suggesting a good validity assessment of the

measurement model.

Table 5.13 AVE and CR Values of the Measurement Model

Note: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001

CR AVE cSATISF cEGOV cTRANSPY cACOUNT cTECH cEXPEC cTRANSF cPERFO cTRU_COF

cSATISF 0.932 0.733 0.856

cEGOV 0.897 0.594 0.756 0.771

cTRANSPY 0.844 0.576 0.754 0.83 0.759

cACOUNT 0.862 0.61 0.738 0.796 0.899 0.781

cTECH 0.771 0.53 0.782 0.769 0.887 0.966 0.728

cEXPEC 0.946 0.614 0.81 0.731 0.846 0.882 0.896 0.783

cTRANSF 0.925 0.711 0.608 0.569 0.773 0.791 0.74 0.855 0.843

cPERFO 0.899 0.691 0.948 0.783 0.791 0.775 0.796 0.821 0.656 0.831

cTRU_COF 0.936 0.745 0.791 0.674 0.75 0.785 0.771 0.85 0.785 0.774 0.863



5.11 Path Analysis

Path analysis is conducted for testing the proposed hypotheses in the conceptual model. As pointed

out in the previous chapters, the conceptual model for this research consists of nine variables and

eight hypotheses. Table 5.14 and Figure 5.2 present results of path analysis conducted using

AMOS.

Table 5.14 Path Analysis Results

Hypotheses

# Path

Standardized Coefficient

(t)P Results

H1c EXPEC→TRANSF 0.323(26.9166667)*** Supported

H1b TECH→TRANSF -0.694(-57.8333333)*** Supported

H1a EGOV→TRANSF -0.140(-11.6666667)*** Supported

H1d TRANSPY→TRANSF 0.154(12.8333333)*** Supported

H1e ACOUNT→TRANSF 0.605(50.4166667)*** Supported

H2 TRANSF→PERFO 0.957(79.75)*** Supported

H3 PERFO→SATISF 0.996(19.92)*** Supported

H4 SATISF→TRU_COF 0.963(74.0769231)*** Supported

Note: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001

Figure 5.2 Path Analysis Results

Table 5.14 shows the path analysis results, where all eight hypotheses proposed for this research

are supported. E-government has a significant negative effect on transformation (b=-0.140, t= -

11.6, ***), thus providing support for H1a. Technology also shows a significant negative effect on

transformation (b=-0.694, t=-57.8, ***) which support H1b. Expectations show a significant

positive effect on transformation (b=0.323, t=26.9, ***), so H1c is supported. Transparency also

shows a significant positive effect on transformation (b=0.154, t=12.8, ***), so H1d is supported.

Impact of accountability on transformation is also significant and positive (b=0.605, t=50.4, ***),

so H1e is supported. Transformation shows a positive significant effect on performance (b=0.957,



t=79.75, ***), so H2 is supported. Performance has a significant positive effect on satisfaction

(b=0.996, t=19.92, ***), thus providing support for H3. Finally, satisfaction also shows a

significant positive effect on trust and confidence (b=0.963, t=74.07, ***) which support H4.

5.12 Mediation Effect

Two constructs, performance and satisfaction, are proposed as mediators in the conceptual model.

Therefore, one of the objectives identified for this research is to examine the mediation effect of

performance and satisfaction on the relationship between transformation and citizens’ trust and

confidence. Outcomes of the path analysis are utilized to observe the mediation effects of both

performance and satisfaction. Table 5.15 shows that paths between Satisfaction→Trust and

Confidence, Performance→Trust and Confidence and Transformation of Government→Trust and

Confidence are all significant. This indicates that both, performance and satisfaction mediate

partially between transformation and trust and confidence in government.

Table 5.15 Standardized Regression Weights

Path Estimate P

EXPEC→TRANSF 0.323 ***

TECH→TRANSF -0.694 ***

EGOV→TRANSF -0.140 ***

TRANSPY→TRANSF 0.154 ***

ACOUNT→TRANSF 0.605 ***

TRANSF→PERFO 0.957 ***

PERFO→SATISF 0.996 ***

SATISF→TRU_COF 0.963 ***

TRANSF→TRU_COF 0.918 ***

PERFO→TRU_COF 0.959 ***

In addition, direct and indirect effects of all paths in the proposed conceptual model are presented

in the four figures below. Figure 5.3 shows that all paths for e-government, technology,

transparency, accountability and expectation on transformation are having direct significant

effects. No indirect effect is found here.



Figure 5.3 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Transformation

Figure 5.4 shows the direct and indirect effects on performance. The direct effect is between

transformation and performance. Accountability, transparency and expectation have indirect

positive significant effects on performance. On the other hand, e-government and technology have

indirect negative significant effects.

Figure 5.4 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Performance

Figure 5.5 shows the direct and indirect effects on satisfaction. The direct effect is between

performance and satisfaction. Accountability, transparency, expectation and transformation have

indirect positive significant effects on satisfaction. E-government and technology have indirect

negative significant effects.

0.6050.154

-0.14-0.694

0.323

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

AC

OU

NT-

>TR

AN

SF

TRA

NSP

Y->

TRA

NSF

EGO

V->

TR

AN

SF

TEC

H->

TR

AN

SF

EXP

EC->

TR

AN

SF

TRA

NSF

->TR

AN

SF

PER

FO->

TR

AN

SF

SATI

SF->

TR

AN

SF

Direct Indirectx Construct -> Transformation



Figure 5.5 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Satisfaction

Figure 5.6 shows the direct and indirect effects on trust and confidence. The direct effect is between

satisfaction and trust and confidence. Accountability, transparency, expectation, transformation

and performance have indirect positive significant effects on citizens’ trust and confidence. E-

government and technology, on the other hand, have indirect negative significant effects.

Figure 5.6 Total Effects of Direct and Indirect Paths on Trust and Confidence


Chapter 5 presents data analysis, including results from different tests, and findings from CFA and

path analysis. It starts with illustrating response rate and sample size of the online survey, followed

by a profile of the respondents. There was no gender or age bias in the respondent profile, and

most respondents were highly educated and well paid.

In order to identify potential problems with variables, early in the process, as well as preparing the

variables for a smooth SEM phase, EFA was employed. This was followed by reliability and

validity testing of the research instrument to ensure consistency and accuracy of the research. Next,



descriptive statistics were presented, with means and standard deviation for all items of the

research instrument.

In order to describe the degree of relationship between different variables, a correlation matrix was

employed to confirm that there was significant correlation amongst the variables. Another

important test conducted was the Skewness and Kurtosis test for validating the normality of data

distribution. This test proved that the distribution of data was normal.

SEM was chosen to validate the fitness of the conceptual model and test the hypotheses by

performing CFA and path analysis. CFA resulted in a good fit for the measurement model. Values

for standardized loadings, critical rations and R squares were in line with the recommended values.

Furthermore, construct validity was examined by adopting convergent validity, which resulted in

good validity of the measurement model. Path analysis confirmed that all the eight hypotheses

suggested for this research were supported by the gathered data. Mediation effects were also

analysed, which illustrate that both performance and satisfaction mediate partially between

transformation and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Finally, the direct and indirect

effects of all paths of the proposed conceptual model were presented and analysed. The Next

chapter will discuss the findings of this research.

Chapter 6: Discussion


CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION



Chapter 6 : Discussion

6.1 Introduction

Chapter 5 presented outcomes of the data analysis conducted on the collected data from ordinary

citizens living in Bahrain. The data analysis covered different tests performed and findings of the

CFA and path analysis. The eight hypotheses suggested for this research were supported by the

empirical findings.

Chapter 6 discusses the findings of the data analysis presented in chapter 5 as well as mapping the

findings to the gaps identified and the three questions agreed for this research. The outcomes of

the empirical findings of this research are consistent with the literature review. In this chapter,

answers to the three research questions and results of the eight hypotheses are thoroughly

discussed, justified, explained and linked to the practical side. Moreover, the findings of this

research illustrate that transformation of government has a significant positive effect on citizens’

trust and confidence. It is interesting to find that e-government and technology are not sufficient

for achieving a true transformed government. Three other factors should be considered, which are

citizens’ expectations, adoption of transparency and activating accountability

This chapter is structured as follows. Section 6.2 provides an overview of the research in hand

while in section 6.3 the concept of citizens’ trust and confidence in government and transformation

of government is revisited. In section 6.4, instrument validation process and results are presented.

This is followed by section 6.5, which includes an overview of the findings, answering the three

research questions, presenting and discussing outcomes of the hypotheses testing, clarifying the

role of the mediators and finally presenting the direct and indirect effects of all paths of the

proposed conceptual model. Some thoughts on the empirical findings are presented in section 6.6.

The last section, 6.7, summarizes the overall chapter.

6.2 Overview of the Research

The aim of this research was to investigate the influence of transformation of government on

citizens’ trust and confidence in government from citizens’ perspective. Transformation of

Government was defined as the fundamental changes to the way core functions of government are



performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency In doing so, three research

questions were posited for this research, which were: (1) what factors influence transformation of

government, (2) how these factors influence transformation, and (3) how transformation of

government can be related to trust and confidence in citizens. In order to fulfil the aim and answer

the three research questions, literature review was performed using secondary and primary sources.

During this phase, key factors influencing transformation of government and trust and confidence

in government were identified and explained. A conceptual model was then developed using the

model developed by Morgeson et al. (2011) as a base model and taking into account the factors

identified during the literature phase. The defined constructs and relationships within the

conceptual model were supported by appropriate theories. In terms of research methodology, this

research adopted a quantitative methodology using an online survey, targeting randomly, ordinary

citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain. In order to validate the conceptual model and ensure reliability

of the data, a pilot survey was conducted prior to conducting the major survey. SEM was employed

for this research as multivariate analysis technique. CFA and path analysis were performed which

resulted in a good fit of the proposed conceptual model and supporting all hypotheses set for this

research. Findings of the data analysis are discussed in details in the below sections of this chapter.

6.3 Revisiting the Concept of Citizen’s Trust and Confidence in Government and

Transformation of Government

The literature review presented in the previous chapters showed that citizens’ trust in their

government has been declining during the last two decades (Bean, 2015; Edwards, 2015;

Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015;

2016; 2017). E-government was seen as a way of reducing this decline when introduced and

implemented in different parts of the world (Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and

Mossberger, 2006). During the last two decades, a large sum of money has been spent on various

e-government projects around the world as illustrated in the Table 6.1 below.

Table 6.1Money spent on e-government projects

Country Amount Reference

USA – as of 2014 $ 36,65 billons since 1992 Mukhoryanova et al. (2016)

South Korea – as of 2014 $ 1.6 billons since 2003 Mukhoryanova et al. (2016)

Russia– as of 2014 $ 0,18 billons since 2002 Mukhoryanova et al. (2016)

UK –2001 $ 520 millions Basu (2004)

India –2001 $ 189 millions Basu (2004)



1,129 investment lending

projects in 135 countries funded

by the World Bank

$ 292, 677 millions since 1995 World Bank (2017)

However, the introduction of e-government has failed to meet the desired outcomes nor helped in

reversing the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government due to conflicting conclusions

on the relation between e-government and citizens’ trust in government (Bannister and Connolly,

2011; Kim et al., 2009; Morgeson et al., 2011; Weerakkody et al., 2009; Welch et al., 2005). In

the UK, many of the large scale transformation projects that were implemented under the e-

government agenda failed to meet their outcomes as illustrated in Table 6.2.

Table 6.2 Failing e-government projects

Project Amount Lost Reference

C-Nomis (UK) £2 billion The Economist (Feb, 2008)

e-Boarder system (UK) £ 224 millions The Guardian (19 August, 2014)

BBC – Video Archives System (UK) £ 100 millions The Guardian (19 August, 2014)

Ministry of Justice – Back Office Project (UK) £ 56 millions The Guardian (19 August, 2014)

NHS’s National Programme for IT (UK) £ 10 billions The Guardian (19 August, 2014)

Common Agricultural Policy Delivery

Programme £ 642 millions since 2005 House of Commons (Feb, 2017)

Healthcase.gov (USA) $ 630 millions Anthopoulos et al. (2016)

Some scholars have posited that transformation of government has the potential to reverse the

decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and

Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005). In addition to transformation of government, other factors

identified in the literature that influence citizens’ trust and confidence in government include e-

government (Morgeson et al., 2011; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), technology (Morgeson et al.,

2011; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), transparency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al.,

2009), accountability (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009), citizens’ expectations

(Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011), transformation of government (Bannister

and Connolly, 2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005), government performance

(Bouckaert et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de Walle

et al., 2008) and citizens’ satisfactions (Bouckaert et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al.,

2008; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de Walle et al., 2008).

Despite e-government initiatives starting late in GCC countries compared to other parts of the

world such as Europe and North America, they have reached advanced stages and achieved high



rankings in several GCC countries as per the United Nations E-Government Survey Reports

released in 2012, 2014 and 2016. These advanced levels could have not been achieved without the

investments made in the region on e-government initiatives. Yet, the United Nations E-

Government Survey Report 2016 highlighted that e-participation still remains an issue in both the

developed and developing countries. Limited studies that have focused on the GCC region have

confirmed that citzens’ trust and confidence plays a role in this issue (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody,

2008; AlSobhi et al., 2010). Compared to the rest of the world, there is lack of studies conducted

in GCC countries, which investigated the influence that transformation of government has on

citizens’ trust and confidence in government. These reasons make the GCC region an attractive

region to investigate the influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. In order to investigate the influence of transformation of government

on the citizens’ trust and confidence in government, a conceptual model was developed building

upon the model proposed by Morgeson et al. (2011) and supported by several other theories. Five

factors which are critical for the context of transformation of government, which are currently

discussed separately in the literature are reviewed and synthesized to propose hypotheses to

examine their relationships with transformation of government. The conceptual model was

validated in Bahrain and proven functioning well as all eight hypotheses proposed for this research

were supported based on 313 responses received from citizens’ living in Bahrain.

It is worth pointing out that previous theoretical models and frameworks focused on the

relationship between trust in government and take-up of e-government systems (Abu-Shanab and

Al-Azzam, 2012; Bélanger and Carter, 2008; Carter and Bélanger, 2005; Colesca, 2009; Navarrete,

2010; Teo et al., 2008) and the effect of e-government on trust in governments (Grimmelikhuijsen,

2009; McNeal et al., 2008; Morgeson et al., 2011; Pina et al., 2010; Pina and Royo, 2009; Tolbert

and Mossberger, 2006). Welch et al. (2005) on the other hand covered some elements of

transformation of government and trust of government with an emphasis on e-government systems

rather than digital ‘transformation of government’ (i.e. that was focused on changes to the way

core functions of government are performed through ICT).



6.4 Instrument Validation

In order to validate the findings of the research, it is essential to conduct the reliability and validity

of the research instrument before and after the data collection (Hair et al., 2010; Straub el al.,

2004). Cronbach's alpha was used to measure the reliability. Alpha values at 0.7 were considered

as acceptable, exceeding 0.7 were good, while those below 0.7 were considered as poor (Sekaran,

2000). On the other hand, internal consistency measure was adopted for measuring validity;

specifically inter-item correlation and item to total correlation of items under each construct were

measured. Minimum correlation value was set as acceptable at 0.3 and the maximum was set at

0.8 for the inter-item correlation measure, whereas minimum correlation value was set as

acceptable at 0.5 for item to total correlation measure (Robinson et al., 1991a). Results of the

reliability and validity analysis conducted on the pilot and main surveys’ instruments showed that

values of Cronbach's alpha, Inter-item correlation and Item-to total correlation were exceeding 0.7,

0.3 and 0.5 respectively. Therefore, it can be concluded that the research instruments used for the

pilot and main surveys were valid and reliable.

Following adopting SEM for this research and performing CFA, convergent validity was used to

measure construct validity (Hair et al., 2010). Convergent validity was examined through using

standardized loadings of all items, AVE and CR. Acceptable value for the Standardized loadings

were achieved as shown under section 5.10.2. The CR and AVE of all the constructs as illustrated

in Table 5.13 were higher than 0.7 and 0.5 respectively. As such, convergent validity resulted in a

good validity of the measurement model.

6.5 Significance of the Empirical Findings

6.5.1 Overview of the Findings

Following the literature review and to fulfil the aim and objectives agreed for this research, the

developed conceptual model consisted of nine constructs and eight hypotheses amongst these

constructs, which were explained, in details in chapter 3. The conceptual model was validated and

accordingly path analysis was conducted and the results are illustrated in Table 6.3 below. It should

be noted that all answers represent citizens’ perception of every defined construct and relationship

within the conceptual model.



Table 6.3 Path Analysis Results

Hypotheses

# Path

Standardized Coefficient

(t)P Results

H1c EXPEC→TRANSF 0.323(26.9166667)*** Supported

H1b TECH→TRANSF -0.694(-57.8333333)*** Supported

H1a EGOV→TRANSF -0.140(-11.6666667)*** Supported

H1d TRANSPY→TRANSF 0.154(12.8333333)*** Supported

H1e ACOUNT→TRANSF 0.605(50.4166667)*** Supported

H2 TRANSF→PERFO 0.957(79.75)*** Supported

H3 PERFO→SATISF 0.996(19.92)*** Supported

H4 SATISF→TRU_COF 0.963(74.0769231)*** Supported

Note: * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001

Results of the path analysis show that the eight hypotheses suggested for this research are

supported. In details, e-government has a significant negative effect on transformation (b=-0.140,-

t=11.6, ***), thus providing support for H1a. Technology also shows a significant negative effect

on transformation (b=-0.694, t=-57.8, ***) which support H1b. Expectations shows a significant

positive effect on transformation (b=0.323, t=26.9, ***), so H1c is supported. Transparency also

shows a significant positive effect on transformation (b=0.154, t=12.8, ***), so H1d is supported.

Impact of accountability on transformation is also significant positive (b=0.605, t=50.4, ***), so

H1e is supported. Transformation shows a positive significant effect on performance (b=0.957,

t=79.75, ***), so H2 is supported. Performance as well has a significant positive effect on

satisfaction b=0.996, t=19.92, ***), thus providing support for H3. Finally, satisfaction also shows

a significant positive effect on trust and confidence (b=0.963, t=74.07, ***) which support H4.

6.5.2 Answers to the Research Questions

Three questions were set for this research, which were: (1) what factors influence transformation

of government, (2) how these factors influence transformation of government, and (3) how

transformation of government can be related to trust and confidence in citizens. Based on the

results presented in the previous section, all eight hypotheses suggested for this research were

supported. Therefore, the below paragraphs provide answers to the three research questions.



6.5.2.1 Research Question Q1

The literature review identified eight factors influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in

government being e-government (Morgeson et al., 2011; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006),

technology (Morgeson et al., 2011; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), transparency (Bannister and

Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009), accountability (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al.,

2009), citizens’ expectations (Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011),

transformation of government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016;

Zwahr et al., 2005), government performance (Bouckaert et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Van

de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de Walle et al., 2008) and citizens’ satisfactions (Bouckaert

et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de

Walle et al., 2008).

The conceptual model developed for this research investigates the relationship between

transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. For this purpose,

five factors supported by the literature were hypothesized to influence transformation of

government which were e-government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Bellamy and Taylor, 1998;

Kraemer and King, 2006), technology (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Bingham, 2010; Bonham

et al., 2001; Kim et al., 2009; Weerakkody et al., 2009), expectation (Dalton, 2005; Graham and

Avery, 2013; Welch et al., 2005), transparency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Brown, 1999;

Fountain, 2001; Northrup and Thorson, 2003) and accountability (Bannister and Connolly, 2011;

Bingham, 2010; Kim et al., 2009; Norquist, 2007). Findings of the research support the

relationships between the five factors mentioned above and transformation of government and

further, all five factors have significant effect on transformation of government as can be seen in

table 6.3.

The above means citizens perceive that in order to have a real, impactful and successful

transformed government five factors should be considered which are (1) the introduction of e-

government as an officially promoted system in the country, (2) adoption of latest technologies by

all government agencies that support digital initiatives and shifting the way government functions,

(3) meet citizens’ expectation from the government and its services (4) adoption of transparency

in its functions and operations and (5) finally practicing accountability where the government or



the concerned government agency is fully accountable to its citizens through being ready to

provide justification for its conduct. This answers research question Q1 identified for this research.


As stated above, five factors are identified which are influencing transformation of government.

Out of these, three factors have positive effect on transformation of government, which are

citizens’ expectations, transparency and accountability. The literature confirms the relationships

between the three factors and transformation of government as shown in the above section. The

positive effects of transparency and accountability on transformation of government are logical in

practice as the general agenda of transformation comes by default with accountability and

transparency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011). Indeed, managing and meeting citizens’

expectations and demands in terms of expected services, ease of performing processes and

procedures, timeline for processes and required evidence have a positive effect on transformation

of government.

On the other hand, e-government and technology have negative effect on transformation of

government. The literature related to these relationships show that there are conflicting views on

the role of e-government and technology in the context of transforming government. Reflecting on

such conflicting views, some researchers have argued that e-government and technology can help

in transforming government (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2008; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010;

Srivastava and Teo, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004). Other

researchers have pointed out that many e-government projects failed (Alsaeed et al., 2014;

Anthopoulos et al., 2016; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Choi et al., 2016; Das Aundhe et al.,

2016; Gunawong and Gao, 2017; Omar et al., 2017; Sehli et al., 2016; Waller and Weerakkody,

2016). In practice, the reasons for the negative effect of e-government and technology on

transformation of government may be linked to the specific context and conditions of Bahrain (i.e.

demographic and/or socio-cultural issues and relative newness of e-government), which is where

the study conducted. This is further explained under the hypotheses related to e-government and

transformation of government as well as technology and transformation of government. This

answers research question Q2 identified for this research.




As per the literature, there is a lack of knowledge on how transformation of government influences

citizens’ trust and confidence in government. In fact, this is the key gap found in this study and

thus the research in hand attempts to address it and in doing so, research question Q3 was posited.

Following the above answers to research Q1 and Q2, the answer to research Q3 is relatively clear.

As per the findings of this research, transformation of government has a positive significant effect

on citizens’ trust and confidence mediated by performance of government and citizens’

satisfaction. This relation is illustrated in table 6.3 above and explained in details under sections

5.11 and 5.12. In practice, this means that citizens’ trust and confidence in government will be

enhanced if there is a real transformation of government, which can be achieved through

considering and adopting five factors to be part of the transformation agenda. The five factors as

presented above are (1) the introduction of e-government as an officially promoted system in the

country, (2) adoption of latest technologies by all government agencies that support digital

initiatives and shifting the way government function and work, (3) meet and manage citizens’

expectations and (4) and (5) adoption of transparency in all functions, activities and operations of

the government as well as the government being fully accountable to its citizens. This answers

research question Q3 as well as bridging the gap identified in this research.

The knowledge gained through answering the three research questions may enhance citizens’ trust

and confidence in government as well helping in reversing its decline.

6.5.3 Results of the Hypotheses Testing

As mentioned previously, the research in hand proposed eight hypotheses amongst the nine

constructs defined within the conceptual model. All eight hypotheses were supported by the

empirical findings of this research, which represent citizens’ perception of every defined construct

and relationship within the conceptual model. The sections that follow discuss each hypothesis

separately and confirm whether each hypothesis is confirmed by the collected data or not.



6.5.3.1 H1a E-government and Transformation of Government

As per the literature, e-government was viewed as a solution to reverse the decline in citizens’ and

confidence in government as well as helping to transform the way government functions and

delivers services (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2008; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010; Srivastava

and Teo, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006; Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004). Additionally, e-

government was viewed as a means to enable transparency and promote accountability (Liu and

Zhou, 2010). The literature also suggests that many e-government based initiatives failed

(Anthopoulos et al., 2016; Alsaeed et al., 2014; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Choi et al., 2016;

Das Aundhe et al., 2016; Gunawong and Gao, 2017; Omar et al., 2017; Sehli et al., 2016; Waller

and Weerakkody, 2016) and thus citizens’ trust and confidence has continued to decline (Bannister

and Connolly, 2011; Bean, 2015; Edwards, 2015; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; West,

2004; World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017). To support this view,

table 6.1 lists amounts spent on e-government projects, particularly in the UK. Despite these large

investments, table 6.2 lists a number of failing e-government projects. The focus of many of these

e-government projects was technical which means provisioning of portals, websites and other

digital means for using e-government services (Omar et al., 2017; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016).

As such, many e-government initiatives did not achieve the desired outcomes nor resulted in

transformed governments (in a way that would result in real changes to the way government

functions of delivers services) (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016;

Zwahr et al., 2005).

Result of H1a testing shows that e-government has a significant negative effect on transformation

(b=-0.140, t=-11.6, ***), thus providing support for H1a. This finding is in line with outcomes of

prior researches (Anthopoulos et al., 2016; Alsaeed et al., 2014; Bannister and Connolly, 2011;

Choi et al., 2016; Das Aundhe et al., 2016; Gunawong and Gao, 2017; Omar et al., 2017; Sehli et

al., 2016; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016). Despite the fact that Bahrain has an advanced e-

government platform, the United Nations e-Government Surveys released in 2014 and 2016

confirm the finding of H1a from two perspectives. First, Bahrain was ranked 24th globally in the

2016 EGDI index whereas it ranked 18 globally in the 2014 report. Second, Bahrain was ranked

32nd globally in the e-participation sub-index of the 2016 UN report whereas it ranked 14th globally

as per the 2014 UN report.



Despite the fact that respondents to the survey use internet, the reasons for the negative effect of

e-government on transformation of government may be linked to the specific context of the place

where this study was conducted - Bahrain. For instance, skills needed to use e-government

services, trust in e-government systems, security and privacy concerns, not interested in services

provide by e-government, awareness issues, continued use of personal contacts within government

agencies to fulfil needs instead of using e-government systems, poor experience of using e-

government systems, and finally lack of training and education provided to citizens to use e-

government systems may all influence citizens perception towards e-government. Apart from these

reasons, the negative effect may be related to the technical oriented focus of e-government systems

in Bahrain. Moving forward, these potential reasons should be taken into account by the

government and concerned agencies in Bahrain so that successful transformation of government

can be achieved.

The key message here is that e-government cannot work alone and thus other factors should be

considered in parallel for meeting the desired results.

6.5.3.2 H1b Technology and Transformation of Government

Technology is closely related with e-government and as such, the majority of arguments and

recommendations presented in the previous section are applicable here too. Technology is more of

a wider term that refers to the use of information technology in all government agencies to perform

and function their businesses and duties (Al Rub, 2006). This includes integration with the e-

government system as well as provisioning of the government agency’s specific services. The

literature pointed out that technology plays a key role in enabling transformation of government

and enhancing government performance (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009).

Furthermore, transparency and accountability are enhanced as a result of using technology

(Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009; Norquist, 2007).

As stated in the previous section, technology in general and e-government in particular were

proposed as an integrated solution to reverse the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in

government as well as transform the government. Since technology is working closely with e-



government, the same conflicting views presented under e-government are applicable here. Some

say it helps in achieving the desired form of transformed government (Al-Shafi and Weerakkody,

2008; Al-Shafi and Weerakkody, 2010; Srivastava and Teo, 2009; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006;

Welch et al., 2005; West, 2004) whereas others say many e-government and technology based

initiatives failed and did not achieve the expected results (Anthopoulos et al., 2016; Alsaeed et al.,

2014; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Choi et al., 2016; Das Aundhe et al., 2016; Gunawong and

Gao, 2017; Omar et al., 2017; Sehli et al., 2016; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016). Tables 6.1 and

6.2 support this view. For this reason, citizens’ trust and confidence in government is still

considered as an alarming issue that should be resolved (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Bean,

2015; Edwards, 2015; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; West, 2004; World Employment

and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017).

Result of H1b testing shows that technology has a significant negative effect on transformation

(b=-0.694, t=-57.8, ***) which support H1b. This finding is in line with outcomes of prior research

(Anthopoulos et al., 2016; Alsaeed et al., 2014; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Choi et al., 2016;

Das Aundhe et al., 2016; Gunawong and Gao, 2017; Omar et al., 2017; Sehli et al., 2016; Waller

and Weerakkody, 2016). Furthermore, United Nations e-Government Surveys released in 2014

and 2016 confirm the finding of H1b where Bahrain’s ranking in the EGDI index and e-

participation sub-index decreased by 6 and 18 levels respectively.

Many of the reasons highlighted above can be used here to explain the negative effect of

technology on transformation of government such as skills needed, trust in the medium, security,

privacy, training and awareness. Additionally, integration amongst government agencies as well

as compatibility between systems in different government agencies to support the specifications

of the e-government systems and standards may explain the negative effect.

The above potential reasons should be taken into account by the government and concerned

agencies in Bahrain in moving forward with any transformation efforts in government. The key

message here is that technology alone does not deliver transformed government nor result in

enhancing trust in government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011).



6.5.3.3 H1c Citizens’ Expectation and Transformation of Government

Meeting citizens’ expectation is considered as a key factor for achieving successful transformation

of government and restoring citizens’ trust in government (Nam, 2012). The literature explained

that citizens’ expectation can be met through a number of mechanism including empowering,

involving, engaging and consulting with citizens prior to and/or post launching of e-government

services (Hanna, 2009).

Result of H1c shows that expectation has a significant positive effect on transformation of

government (b=0.323, t=26.9, ***), so H1c is supported. This finding is consistent with outcomes

of the literature review (e.g. Hanna, 2009; Nam, 2012).

To interpret the finding of H1c, citizens perceive that their expectations are met and taken into

consideration and thus successful transformation of government is achieved. In practice, it is

believed that citizens’ expectations are related to provisioning of services at the time promised by

the government, offering prompt services, readiness of the government to respond to citizens’

queries, government officials give attention to all, understand citizens’ needs and have the

knowledge to answer citizens’ questions, citizens feel safe and confident when they perform their

transactions, government informs citizens in advance of any changes to the services and

government maintaining error-free-records.

The above are some parameters of citizens’ expectations that should be taken into account by the

government and concerned agencies in Bahrain in their e-government agenda and efforts to

transform government.

6.5.3.4 H1d Transparency and Transformation of Government

One key element of the transformation agenda is transparency and it comes by default with

accountability (Bannister and Connolly, 2011). Moreover, it enhances performance of the

government as well as citizens’ trust in government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Welch et al.,

2005). The literature confirms that technology enhances further the implementation of

transparency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009; Welch and Hinnant's, 2002; Welch

et al., 2005). However, national culture may affect implementation of transparency in different



countries (De Fine Licht, 2011; Grimmelikhuijsen, 2012a; Grimmelikhuijsen et al., 2013; Hood,

2006; O’Neill, 2002; Roberts, 2006; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006). The literature highlighted

that transparency can be implemented in different forms; for instance the visibility of all

government related information, processes and procedures to outsiders (Chen et al., 2003; Song

and Lee, 2013; Welch et al., 2005).

Result of H1d shows that transparency has a significant positive effect on transformation of

government (b=0.154, t=12.8, ***), so H1d is supported. This finding is consistent with outcomes

of the literature review (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Welch et al., 2005).

To interpret the finding of H1d, citizens perceive that when transparency is present, it results in

successful transformation of government and enhances performance of government. In practice,

transparency can be fulfilled through dissemination of government related information, processes,

procedures, services, tracking applications, activities, transactions, policies, decisions, regulations

and legal instruments as well as commissioning consulting process with the stakeholders. These

findings offer valuable insights to the government in Bahrain and others elsewhere.

6.5.3.5 H1e Accountability and Transformation of Government

Both transparency and accountability come with the transformation agenda (Bannister and

Connolly, 2011) and result in improving the performance of the government and citizens’ trust in

government (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009; Norquist, 2007). The literature

highlighted that accountability means the government is ready to provide justification for its

conduct to its citizens (Gray et al., 1987; Giddens, 1984; Huse, 2005; ISEA, 1999; Roberts and

Scapens, 1985; Swift, 2001; Williams, 1987).

Result of H1e shows that accountability has a significant positive effect on transformation of

government (b=0.605, t=50.4, ***), so H1e is supported. This finding is consistent with outcomes

of the literature review (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009; Norquist, 2007).

To interpret the finding of H1d, citizens perceive that when accountability is practiced it results in

successful transformation of government and enhances performance of government. In practice,



accountability can be found where government provide justifications for its conduct, existence of

appeal and escalations processes and budgets are used properly and in an authorized manner.

6.5.3.6 H2 Transformation of Government and Performance of Government

Successful transformation of government moves government from traditional to an innovative,

digital, transparent and accountable government that meets citizens’ expectations and demands.

Indeed, it improves the performance of the government and enables it to be more effective and

efficient (Hameed and Al-Shawabkha, 2013; Seifert and Chung, 2009; Waller and Weerakkody,

2016; Zwahr et al., 2005). Transformation here is closely associated with the word change

(Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Cabinet Office, 2005; Moon and Norris, 2005; Waller and

Weerakkody, 2016) meaning that it will significantly improve the processes and functioning of

government compared to traditional or previous way of delivering services.

Result of H2 shows that transformation of government has a positive significant effect on

performance (b=0.957, t=79.75, ***), so H2 is supported. This finding is consistent with outcomes

of the literature review (Al-Shawabkha, 2013; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Seifert and Chung,

2009; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005).

To interpret the finding of H2, citizens perceive that transformation of government that considers

a number of key factors such as e-government, technology, citizens’ expectations, transparency

and accountability results in improving the performance of the government and changes the old

government to an innovate and digital based one. In practice, it means the new government is ready

to accept new ideas for implementing desired changes to be more efficient and effective, high-

level officials in government are eager to do things differently, flexibility is adopted where

procedures are changed quickly to meet new conditions and solve problems as they arise,

transparency is adopted in all functions and activities of the government, the government is

accountable for its conduct and they listen to citizens.

The above are some parameters of transformation of government that should be taken into

consideration by the government and concerned agencies in Bahrain so that performance of the

government is continually improved and enhanced.



6.5.3.7 H3 Performance of Government and Citizens’ Satisfaction

The literature suggest that through being a transformed government, performance of government

improves which leads to satisfied citizens with the government and its services (Morgeson et al.,

2011; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; West, 2004).

Result of H3 shows that performance of government has a positive significant effect on citizens’

satisfaction (b=0.996, t=19.92, ***), so H3 is supported. This finding is consistent with outcomes

of the literature review (Morgeson et al., 2011; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; West, 2004).

To interpret the finding of H3, citizens perceive that real transformation of government results in

improving the performance of the government and satisfied citizens. In practice, performance of

government as perceived by citizens is related to the overall performance of the government and

in particular efficiency and effectiveness of services provided to ordinary citizens. Furthermore,

the performance of the government is linked to finding the needed information when needed and

efficiency in completing transactions. Finally, it can be measured through looking at the values of

public participation and engagement with government.

6.5.3.8 H4 Citizens’ Satisfaction and Citizens’ Trust and Confidence in Government

Citizens’ trust and confidence is the dependent variable in this research. The literature suggests

that citizens’ trust and confidence enhances if citizens’ are satisfied with the performance of

government and its services (Bean, 2015; Morgeson et al., 2011; Van de Walle and Bouckaert,

2003).

Result of H4 shows that citizens’ satisfaction has a positive significant effect on citizens’ trust and

confidence in government (b=0.963, t=74.07, ***), which support H4. This finding is consistent

with outcomes of the literature review (Bean, 2015; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003).

To interpret the finding of H4, citizens perceive that if they are satisfied and happy with the

performance of government as well as its services, their trust and confidence in government

improves. In practice, citizens’ satisfaction is related to citizens’ experience when using

government services in general and in particular while completing government transactions.



Furthermore, it is related with experience when using different channels used to deliver

government services such as website, kiosk, mobile application, national call centres and social

media.

Since trust and confidence is the dependent variable of this research, e-government, technology,

citizens’ expectations, transparency, accountability, transformation of government, performance

of the government and citizens’ satisfaction are the factors that influence citizens’ trust and


6.5.4 Mediation Effects of Performance of Government and Citizens’ Satisfaction

This research investigates the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’

trust and confidence in government. This represents research questions Q3 and it has been

discussed in details in the above sections. Based on the empirical findings of this research,

transformation of government has a positive significant effect on citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. However, the relation between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government is mediated by performance of government and citizens’ satisfaction.

Outcomes of the data analysis and in particular the path analysis is used to find out effects of both

mediators. Table 5.15 shows that paths between (SATISF→TRU_COF), (PERFO→TRU_COF)

and (TRANSF→TRU_COF) are all significant thereby indicating that both performance and

satisfaction mediates partially between transformation and trust and confidence in government.

6.5.5 Total Effects of All Relationships in the Conceptual Model

Direct and indirect effects of all paths of the proposed conceptual model are presented in section

5.12. The direct relationships have been covered under the above sections of this chapter. As for

the indirect relationships, the first one that is not covered above is the relationship between

transformation of government and citizens’ satisfaction. The empirical finding shows that

transformation of government has a positive significant effect on citizens’ satisfaction. This is a

natural effect taking into account that performance of government improved if real transformation

of government exist (i.e. through improvements to the way government functions and delivers

services as a result of fundamental changes implemented to the functions and processes of



government). This in turn results in satisfied citizens. The results of the path analysis prove this

assumption.

The second set of indirect effects are between the five factors of transformation of government: a)

e-government, b) technology, c) transparency, d) accountability and e) citizens’ expectation on

performance of government, citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. The results of the path analysis show that accountability, transparency and citizens’

expectation respectively have indirect significant positive effects on performance of government,

citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in government, whereas e-government and

technology have indirect significant negative effects on performance of government, citizens’

satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. It is interesting to know that the

indirect positive and negative significant effects found here are exactly the same effects of e-

government, technology, transparency, accountability and citizens’ expectations on transformation

of government, which were explained in details in the previous sections of this chapter.

To explain the above outcomes, it is useful to do a comparison between the literature and empirical

findings of this research. The literature suggests that through being a true and successfully

transformed government, performance of government improves, which leads to satisfied citizens

with the government and its services. Moreover, citizens’ trust and confidence improves if

citizens’ are satisfied with the performance of government and its services. The empirical findings

are consistent with outcomes of the literature review. Based on this, the five factors of the

transformation of government - e-government, technology, transparency, accountability and

citizens’ expectation should have the same effects on performance of government, citizens’

satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

From the above section, it is interesting to note that e-government and technology have negative

indirect effects on performance of government, citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. The same reasons stated under H1a and H1b for explaining these

negative effects can be applied here. As explained before, these issues range from the newness of

the e-government program in Bahrain to issues related to the adoption and diffusion of e-



government systems and technical issues faced by the government in delivering integrated e-

government systems. .

6.6 Thoughts on the Empirical Findings

As discussed in the previous sections of this chapter, all suggested hypotheses for this research are

confirmed by the empirical findings. The sequence and the flow of the findings can be summarised

as follows. Real transformation of government (i.e. fundamental changes to the way core functions

of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and efficiency) that takes

into account e-government, technology, citizens’ expectations, transparency and accountability -

influences citizens’ trust and confidence in government and is mediated by performance of

government and citizens’ satisfaction.

However, it was expected that the relationships between e-government and transformation of

government as well as technology and transformation of government to be positively significant.

The negative significant effects can be explained as: e-government and technology alone are not

resulting in a real transformed government. Three other factors should be considered in any agenda

for transforming government. It is clear from the empirical findings that citizens are considering

the adoption of transparency by their government in all of its functions and activities as important,

they also view the practice of accountability and listening to citizens’ suggestions and concerns as

very important in addition to e-government and technology.

6.7 Chapter Summary

The influence of transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government

was identified as the main gap of this research and as such, this research investigated this gap.

Based on the outcome of the data analysis presented in chapter 5, this chapter discusses these

findings and linking them to the literature as well as providing justifications and explanations from

a practical perspective.

In doing so, an overview of the research was provided which included revisiting the related

literature, reasons for conducting this research as well as its significance to knowledge and

practice. Then, answers to the three research questions agreed for this research as well as results



of the hypotheses testing were presented, linked to the literature, thoroughly discussed and justified

taking into account that this research is based on citizens’ perspective on all constructs and

relations defined in the conceptual mode. It is worth pointing out that the empirical findings of this

research are consistent with the outcomes of the literature review. Furthermore, all suggested

hypotheses for this research are supported by the empirical findings.

One point to take into account by government and policy makers is that e-government and

technology are not enough for achieving a successful transformed government and as such, other

factors should be considered, which are, the adoption of transparency by government in all of its

functions and activities, and practicing accountability and listening to citizens’ suggestions and

concerns. Finally, citizen’s trust and confidence is positively influenced by real transformation of

government.

The specific knowledge contributions and practical implications of this research are presented in

chapter 7.

Chapter 7: Conclusion


CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION



Chapter 7 : Conclusion

7.1 Introduction

Chapter 6 discussed the findings of this research and linked them to the literature as well as

provided justifications and explanations for the findings from the practical perspective. In chapter

7, the theoretical and practical contributions of this research are presented, limitations and future

research are highlighted and finally the aim and objectives of this research are revisited.

This chapter is structured as follows. Section 7.2 provides an overview of the research in hand.

This is followed by presenting the research contributions in section 7.3. In section 7.4, policy and

practical implications are discussed. Then, in section 7.5, limitations of the research are highlighted

while providing a number of suggestions for future research in section 7.6. The aim and objectives

set out for this research in chapter 1 are revisited and validated in section 7.7. Personal experience

and lessons learned from the Ph.D journey are outlined in section 7.8. Finally, a summary of the

chapter is provided in section 7.9.

7.2 Research Overview

The literature review exercise concluded that citizens’ trust in their government has continued to

decline during the last two decades (Bean, 2015; Edwards, 2015; Teo et al., 2008; Morgeson et al.,

2011; World Employment and Social Outlook Trends, 2015; 2016; 2017). In the literature, e-

government was viewed as a solution to reverse this decline (see for example Morgeson et al.,

2011; Teo et al., 2008; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006). A number of e-government projects and

solutions were deployed and implemented around the globe for which a large sum of money has

been spent as showed in Table 6.1 of this thesis. Unfortunately, many of the e-government projects

failed and did not meet the expected results. Citizens’ trust and confidence on the other hand has

continued to decline (Welch et al. 2005; Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009;

Morgeson et al., 2011; Weerakkody et al., 2009). In investigating the phenomena of the decline in

citizens’ trust and confidence in government, digital or ICT enabled transformation of government

was found to have the potential to reverse this decline through fundamental changes to the way

core functions of government are performed to achieve noticeable gains in performance and



efficiency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016; Zwahr et al., 2005).

From reviewing the literature, it can be concluded that there is a gap in the literature, which is a

lack of studies that investigated the relationship and influence of transformation of government on

citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

In addition to e-government and transformation of government, other factors have been identified

in the literature that influence citizens’ trust and confidence, such as, technology (Morgeson et al.,

2011; Tolbert and Mossberger, 2006), transparency (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al.,

2009), accountability (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Kim et al., 2009), citizens’ expectations

(Morgeson and Petrescu, 2011; Morgeson et al., 2011), government performance (Bouckaert et

al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de Walle et al., 2008)

and citizens’ satisfactions (Bouckaert et al., 2005; Morgeson et al., 2011; Teo et al., 2008; Van de

Walle and Bouckaert, 2003; Van de Walle et al., 2008). However, there is no comprehensive

research that has investigated these factors in detail nor agreed on a set of common factors that

contribute to the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in government (Bannister and Connolly,

2011; West, 2004). Many of the previous studies have largely focused on technical, service quality,

usability and adoption aspects of ICT enabled transformation projects in government with limited

impact on practice. In other words, most prior studies have focused on e-government systems and

citizen facing aspects and largely ignored the policy issues that trigger transformation together

with the broader issues of change that is needed within the transformation agenda. Therefore, there

is a gap in research to gain a deeper insight into the decline in citizens’ trust and confidence in

government and its relationship with digital transformation of government.

As such, the aim of this research was to investigate the influence of digital transformation of

government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Furthermore, effects of other factors

on this phenomenon were also investigated in this research. Bahrain as part of the GCC countries

was selected for conducting this research as it is the most advanced country in e-government

development and implementation as per the United National Surveys of 2012, 2014 and 2016.

Moreover, the demographic make-up of the country, the support for e-government from its

government (around $106 million, has been allocated for digital government initiatives in Bahrain

since the inception of the e-government initiative in 2007), and the e-participation related

challenges currently faced in Bahrain (United Nations E-Government Survey, 2014; 2016) as well



as the lack of studies conducted in Bahrain that investigated the relationship between

transformation efforts in government and citizens’ trust in government provided the rationale for

selecting Bahrain as the empirical context for this study. In order to achieve the aim of this

research, three research questions were posited which were: (1) what factors influence

transformation of government, (2) how these factors influence transformation of government, and

(3) how transformation of government can be related to trust and confidence in citizens.

Chapter 1 included much of the above sections as a background and motivation for conducting this

research. Furthermore, it included the aim, objectives, research questions and research hypotheses

suggested for this research.

The outcomes of the literature review are covered in chapter 2, which was conducted using mainly

normative and secondary sources as well as a few primary case study sources. This stage helped

in confirming and synthesising the research problem, gaps and questions as well as research aim

and objectives. Moreover, key factors influencing transformation of government and trust and

confidence in government were been identified and discussed in details along with supporting

theories for each.

The developed conceptual model for this research was illustrated and described in chapter 3. The

conceptual model was influenced by the model developed by Morgeson et al. (2011) and factors

identified during the literature review phase. Additionally, the research hypotheses were suggested

along with the supporting theories for every defined construct and relationship within the

conceptual mode as well as the base theory that supports the conceptual model.

The research design and approach was defined and presented in chapter 4. Positivism was selected

as a research philosophy and explanatory as a research purpose as it best suited the aim and

objectives of this research. Accordingly, a quantitative methodology was employed for this

research. The target audiences which are ordinary citizens living in Bahrain were approached

randomly through the development and distribution of an online survey through different means

such as email, SMS and social media applications. Prior to launching the main survey, pre-test and

pilot test were performed to validate the conceptual model and hypotheses as well as to ensure the

data collected during the pilot test was reliable.



Data analysis of the collected data was presented in chapter 5. SEM was chosen as a multivariate

technique for this research to validate the fitness of the conceptual model and test the hypotheses

through performing CFA and path analysis. Before performing CFA and path analysis, a number

of tests were conducted to prepare a clean data for the SEM, which included reliability and validity

of the research instrument, correlation and normality of the data distribution.

In chapter 6, the findings of the data analysis was discussed. It mapped the findings of the research

to the gap identified and the three questions agreed for this research. The outcomes of the empirical

findings of this research were found to be consistent with the literature review. Moreover, answers

to the three research questions and results of the eight hypotheses were thoroughly discussed,

justified, explained and linked to the practical side. It is interesting to find out that e-government

and technology are not sufficient for achieving a true transformed government. Three other factors

should also be considered, which are citizens’ expectations, demonstration of transparency and

practice of accountability.

7.3 Theoretical Contributions

Contents and outcomes of this research synthesised the information system literature and in

particular the areas of ICT or digital enabled transformation of government and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. The sections below present a number of important contributions to the

existing literature and the growing body of knowledge related to important concepts.

7.3.1 Contribution 1: As far as the researcher’s knowledge, this research is first of its type that

investigates from citizens’ perspective the relationship between transformation and citizens’ trust

and confidence in government. Therefore, this research is considered as a novel contribution to the

body of existing knowledge.

7.3.2 Contribution 2: The main gap found for this research was the lack of knowledge on how

digital transformation of government influences citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. As such, the aim agreed for this research was in line with the identified gap.

To address this aim and gap, research question Q3 was posited. As per the outcomes of the

empirical results, transformation of government has a positive significant effect on



citizens’ trust and confidence mediated by performance of government and citizens’

satisfaction.

7.3.3 Contribution 3: Apart from transformation of government, other factors have been

discussed in the literature to understand the phenomena of the decline in citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. However, no common set of factors have been discussed

comprehensively in the literature. To address this, outcomes of this research showed that

e-government, technology, citizens’ expectations, transparency, accountability,

performance of the government and citizens’ satisfaction are the main factors that influence

citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Moreover, the research illustrated how these

factors are influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in government as well as how they

are related and linked with each other. This is visible in the developed conceptual model

as well as section 6.5.5 of this thesis, which shows the total effects of all paths in the

conceptual model.

7.3.4 Contribution 4: Since the aim of this research was to investigate the influence of digital

transformation of government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government, the same

arguments placed above for a need to define a common set of factors influencing citizens’

trust and confidence in government, apply to the transformation of government. To address

this, research question Q1 was posited. As per the outcomes of this research, e-government,

technology, citizens’ expectations, transparency and accountability were found to effect

transformation of government. Furthermore, the research illustrated how these five factors

influence transformation of government, which answer research question Q2 posited for

this research. Out of these five factors, three were found to have positive influence on

transformation of government, which are citizens’ expectations, transparency and

accountability. As for the remaining factors, which are e-government and technology, they

were found to have negative effect on transformation of government. As per the literature,

the term “transformation of government” is a complex one and it is hard to find a common

definition for it (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; West, 2004). The findings of this research,

add to the current knowledge a better understanding of the definition of “transformation of

government” and the role of transparency, accountability, technology, citizens’

expectations and e-government within this context.



7.3.5 Contribution 5: The findings of the research show that transformation of government is

positively influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in government mediated by the

performance of the government and citizens’ satisfaction. The indirect relationships

between performance of the government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government

and the direct relationship between citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and confidence

in government were found to have positive significant effects respectively. Similarly,

transformation of government was found to have an indirect positive significant effect on

citizens’ trust and confidence in government. This indicates that both performance and

satisfaction mediates partially between transformation and trust and confidence in

government. In other words, transformation of government positively influences citizens’

trust and confidence in government with or without mediators. This finding addresses the

research gap by reconfirming that transformation of government positively influences

citizens’ trust and confidence in government, which helps in advancing the understanding

of the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and


7.3.6 Contribution 6: This research found that e-government and technology are not enough for

achieving a successful transformation of government, and improving the performance of

government, or enhancing citizens’ satisfaction and reversing the decline in citizens’ trust

and confidence in government. Other factors should be considered in this equation, which

are adoption of transparency by the government in all of its functions and activities,

practicing accountability and managing and meeting citizens’ expectations and demands.

Although the concepts of transparency and accountability have been discussed in many

studies and are established as key components of e-government, their influence on citizens’

perception of government has not been empirically tested in the context of transformation

of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

7.3.7 Contribution 7: In order to fulfil the aim agreed for this research as well as to answer the

three research questions, a conceptual model was developed, tested and validated. The

conceptual model consisted of nine constructs, eight hypotheses and two mediators. This

bridges the gap found in literature, which revealed an absence of theoretical models



associated with ‘transformation of government’ and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. As far as the research’s knowledge, this is the first conceptual model of its

type that investigates the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’


7.3.8 Contribution 8: The conceptual model was supported and validated by suitable theories

whether it is the base theory for the whole model or theories supporting the proposed

relationships in the model. The base theory in this research, Exit Voice theory, confirmed

the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence

in government. As far as the researcher’s knowledge, this is the first time Exit-Voice

Theory is used in the context of investigating transformation of government and citizens’

trust and confidence in government. The majority of the previous studies conducted in the

area of e-government mainly focused on user adoption theories (example Technology

Acceptance Model, TAM; Diffusion of Innovation, DOI). Only one study (Morgeson et

al., 2011) covered exit voice theory but again in the context of e-government and its

relationship on citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

7.3.9 Contribution 9: The use of quantitative research methodology along with email, SMS and

social media applications - for distribution randomly - an online survey to ordinary citizens

living in Bahrain is considered as a contribution of this research taking into account that

this is the first study of its type as per the researcher’s knowledge within Bahrain. As for

generalising the findings of this research, the use of the quantitative research methodology

supports the generalisation of the findings to some extent within the context of GCC

countries due to their shared values, cultures and political structures (Bryman, 2004;

Creswell, 2008).

7.3.10 Contribution 10: In the context of this research, the use of SEM and AMOS as statistical

tools for data analysis and in particular for conducting CFA and path analysis is considered

as a contribution considering that this is the first study of its type as per the researcher’s

knowledge that investigated the relationship between transformation of government and

citizens’ trust and confidence in government; this sets the path for similar studies in future.



The knowledge gained from the contributions stated above help in better understanding the decline

in citizens’ trust and confidence in government, advancing the understanding of the relationship

between transformation of government and citizens’ trust, and confidence in government.

7.4 Policy and Practice Implications

Since this research is based on citizens’ perspective, outcomes of this research ultimately benefit

citizens in terms of government managing and meeting their expectations and demands, improving

citizens’ satisfaction and finally gaining and retaining citizens’ trust and confidence in the

government.

From citizens’ perspective, the findings of this research confirm that transformation of government

plays a main role in improving citizens’ trust and confidence in government as well as enhancing

citizens’ engagement with government and its services. Furthermore, the research offers a set of

factors that help the policy makers, practitioners and concerned agencies in better understanding

citizens’ trust and confidence in the government as well as transformation of government along

with the effect of each factor on both concepts and how these factors are related with each other.

Factors influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in government are e-government, technology,

citizens’ expectations, transparency, accountability, transformation of government, performance

of the government and citizens’ satisfaction. As for transformation of government, the factors are

e-government, technology, citizens’ expectations, transparency and accountability.

The conceptual model developed for this study illustrates the two concepts, transformation of

government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government, and relationships between both

factors influence each. The conceptual model can be used as a frame of reference for both the

policy makers and researchers for better understanding the phenomena of the decline in citizens’

trust and confidence in government as well as the role of transformation in reversing this decline.

Furthermore, the conceptual model can be used as a predicting or forecasting tool that can be used

by policy makers and practitioners for predicting citizens’ behaviour in terms of expectations,

satisfactions and trust and confidence in government and its services.

The policy makers should take note of the fact that development and implementation of e-

government system in the country is not enough and sufficient for achieving true, real and



successful transformation of government (i.e. that result in fundamental changes to the structure,

functions and core processes of government) nor enhance citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. The same argument applies to technology used by government agencies for the

provisioning of their own services or integrating with the concerned government agencies to

provided digital government services. Other factors should work together with e-government and

technology, which are meeting citizens’ expectations, adopting transparency and practicing

accountability at all levels of government. In practice, this means that governments need to accept

new ideas for implementing the desired changes that will lead to real transformation and high-

level officials in government should be eager to do things differently, and be flexible in adopting

where procedures need changing to meet new conditions and solve problems as they arise. They

also need to be willing to practice transparency in all functions and activities of government, be

accountable for their conduct, and willing to listen to citizens’ needs.

Reflecting on the significant negative effects of e-government and technology on transformation

of government, performance of the government, citizens’ satisfaction and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government, the government and policy makers should acknowledge the fact that

more need to done on both factors so as to minimise the negative impact of challenges such as

skills needed to use e-government services, trust in e-government platforms, security and privacy

concerns, enhance citizens’ interest and awareness in e-government. Other issues that may need

attention include training and education for citizens to use e-government systems, better

integration amongst government agencies to provide one-stop services to citizens.

The findings of the research highlighted other challenges under each construct of this research.

Starting with citizens’ expectations, the key challenges are provisioning of services at the time

promised by the government, offering prompt services, readiness of the government to respond to

citizens’ queries, government officials pay attention to citizens’ needs and have the knowledge to

answer citizens’ questions, citizens feel safe and confident when they perform their online

transactions, government informing citizens in advance of any changes to the services and the

government maintaining error-free-records.

As for transparency, the research identified the following challenges. Dissemination of

government related information such as processes, procedures, services, tracking applications,



activities, transactions, policies, decisions, regulations and legal instruments. Commissioning

consultation processes with the stakeholders is considered as a key issue to be addressed by the

government. On the other hand, accountability exist when government provides justifications for

its conduct, availability of appeals and escalations processes and usage of budgets properly and in

an authorized manner.

Challenges identified for performance of the government revolve around the overall perception of

the performance of the government and in particular efficiency and effectiveness of services

provided to ordinary citizens. Furthermore, finding the needed information and efficiency in

completing transactions. Finally, level of public participation and engagement with government

is important. Citizens’ satisfaction on the other hand is related to citizens’ experience when using

government services in general and in particular while completing government services

transactions. Furthermore, it is related with experience when using different channels used to

deliver government services such as website, kiosk, mobile application, national call centres and

social media.

Moving away from challenges presented in the above sections to the area of policy implications,

the government should accept and acknowledge the complexity of the phenomenon related to

transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. In doing so, any

government policy should address and overcome at least the challenges mentioned above. In

particular, the government should discard the idea that adoption of e-government along with

equipping the government with latest technologies result in real and successful transformation of

government as well as enhancing citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Instead, it should

consider all factors stated above in any policy it wishes to release related to the same. For this,

well-coordinated efforts are needed to take place between different arms of policy makers in the

country.

Despite the advanced stages of e-government implementation in Bahrain, the policy makers should

consider transformation of government along with all factors influencing it carefully so that it

results in a real and successful transformed government (i.e. through fundamental changes to

structure, functions and processes), which has the potential to enhance citizens’ trust and

confidence in government even more. Huge investments have been made on e-government



initiatives in Bahrain since its inception; the e-government budget represents around 23% of the

overall ICT budget on a yearly basis (Frost and Sullivan, March 2017). As such, and in order to

avoid any failures in e-government and associated transformation initiatives (as illustrated in tables

6.1 and 6.2 of this thesis), the results of this research offer many suggestions for government and

policy makers in Bahrain in particular (and others) to consider.

One way to implement the above is through preparation and issuance of a national policy for

transformation of government where all factors highlighted in this research are included and

solutions are offered for the potential challenges that may hinder shifting to a true transformed

government. A proper strategic management framework along with clear targets and Key

Performance Indicators should be in place to ensure the successful development and

implementation of the national policy for transformation of government. Since this is a big and

critical initiative for the country, coordinated efforts need to take place amongst all concerned

parties in government. Another way for enabling a real transformation of government is to

effectively utilise and observe ICT instruments used to implement and deliver new policies (Waller

and Weerakkody, 2016)

The above sections highlighted some implications for policy and practice as well as offering a

number of suggestions for policy makers and practitioners. In detail, it provides an overview of

the broader dimensions of the subject in hand and understanding of the critical factors influencing

citizens’ trust and confidence in government and finally, the effect of transformation of

government on citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

7.5 Research Limitations

Every research has limitations and the same applies for the research in hand. The sections below

present limitations encountered in this research.

The influence of other factors such as cultural and social on citizens’ trust and confidence in

government as well as transformation of government were neither included within the identified

factors for this research nor the developed conceptual model. These two concepts are sensitive and

critical that need in depth understanding and investigation and due to the time constraints of the

research in hand, they were not covered.



Findings of this research are only based on citizens’ perspective on every construct and

relationship defined within the conceptual model. Other perspectives such as governmental,

business, or non-governmental organisations are not covered in this research.

The online survey was randomly distributed to ordinary citizens living in Bahrain through email,

SMS and social media and as such, it appears that the majority of respondents were internet users

and were well educated, which may result in a bias of the results to a certain direction. Although

the online survey was shared with citizens from different areas of Bahrain and different groups,

which span over a variety of professions and backgrounds, still there is a risk that the sample was

drawn from a self-selecting one. As far as the researcher’s knowledge and best efforts in

distributing the survey across Bahrain, the collected sample represents a good demographic mix.

The research methodology adopted for this research was quantitative. Although it can be

supportive for generalisation of the findings, this may restrict the ability of the research to obtain

an in-depth view of factors influencing citizens’ trust and confidence in government as well as

transformation of government from citizens, government and third party perspectives. The

researcher was unable to employ a hybrid / mixed methodology due to time constraints of the

research in hand.

Although outcomes of the research is particularly applicable to the specific situation and conditions

of the place where this study was conducted, Bahrain, generalisation within the GCC region is fair

as most countries share the same political, economic and culture structure. Finally, the United

Nations Surveys released in 2012, 2014 and 2016 consider Bahrain in the same basket as other

GCC countries in terms of the development and implementation of e-government systems.

Generalization beyond the GCC region may be difficult and as such, careful attention should be

given to the differences in political, economic, culture and ICT structures when interpreting the

outcomes of this study in other national and/or regional contexts.

Moderation effect was not covered in this research, which might have provided further

explanations and analysis of impacts of factors such as gender, age, income education level and



nationality on the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and


The limitations pointed out above provide paths for future research, which will enrich and

synthesize the information system literature and in particular the areas of transformation of

government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government.

7.6 Future Research

Deriving from the above limitations, this research offers a number of suggestions for future

research that may result in enriching and strengthening this research.

As mentioned under the limitations section, cultural and social concepts may play an important

role in the context of this study (Bannister and Connolly, 2011; Bertot et al., 2010; Dalton, 2005;

Van de Walle and Bouckaert, 2003). Therefore, future research may investigate their influence on

both transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in government. The

conceptual model can thus be expanded to include cultural and social and then link them to the

existing factors as suitable.

To ensure non-internet users are covered in this research and avoid the risk of self-selecting the

respondents and data obtained from a large and diversified population living in Bahrain, delivery

and collection of questionnaire could have been used in parallel to the online survey (Saunders,

2011). Additionally, increasing the sampling size may overcome any potential bias in the results

towards a certain direction.

To confirm the findings and to obtain an in-depth view of factors influencing citizens’ trust and

confidence in government as well as transformation of government, a qualitative research

methodology through conducting in depth interviews and using focus groups techniques with

citizens’ and citizens’ representatives could have enriched this study.

This research can be conducted in another country in the GCC region or any other country in

different parts of the world. Moreover, since all GCC countries share almost the same political,

economic, culture and ICT structures, it will be interesting to conduct a comparative analysis of



the GCC countries related to the same subject. Going beyond the GCC region, other regions can

replicate similar research.

As mentioned previously, this study is based on citizens’ perceptions on all constructs and

relationships defined and covered within the conceptual model. Therefore, a future study may

cover governmental and political perspectives. Gender, age, income education level and

nationality may be used as moderators in any future research, which will clarify the role and

influence of such control variables on the findings.

Policy aspects of government such as the core functions of government, processes, procedures,

policy/regulations/legal instruments and decision making processes (Bannister and Connolly,

2011; O’Neill, 2009; Waller and Weerakkody, 2016) in presence of factors such as transformation

of government, technology and e-government can also be covered in a future research.

Finally, conducting longitudinal studies along with combining both qualitative and quantitative

methods help tremendously in deep understanding of the impact of transformation on citizens’


7.7 Revisiting the Aim and Objectives of the Research

As explained previously, the aim of this research was to investigate the relationship between

transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence as dependent variable. In order

to achieve the aim of this research, a number of objectives were defined as explained in chapter 1

which are achieved as discussed in different chapters of this thesis. Table 7.1 below illustrates the

five research objectives, indicating whether each objective is met or not and finally providing a

summary on how each objective is accomplished during the different phases of the research along

with mapping into related chapters of the thesis.



Table 7.1 Meeting the Aim and Objectives of the Research

# Research Objective Status Chapter Summary of how the Objective was Accomplished

1

Examining the current literature with regard to factors influencing

transformation of government and understand the relationship that

exists between those factors and transformation of government

Met 1,2

Chapter 2 identified and discussed all factors affecting citizens’ trust and

confidence in government including transformation of government. Moreover,

chapter 2 identified and discussed five factors that are affecting transformation

of government, how these factors are influencing transformation and how these

factors are working collectively

2

In a similar vein, studying the extant literature and reviewing the

theories and models that could be used to understand the concepts of

transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence as well

examining the relationship between the two concepts through proposing

a conceptual model and hypotheses

Met 2,3

Chapters 2 and 3 presented and discussed the different theories and models that

are supporting the concepts covered in this research as well as the potential

relationship between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and

confidence in government. This include, the relationships between factors

influencing transformation of government and transformation of government as

well as transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence

mediated by performance of the government and citizens’ satisfactions.

A conceptual model was developed using the model developed by Morgeson et

al. (2011) as a base model and taking into account the factors identified during

the literature review phase. The defined constructs and relationships within the

conceptual model were supported by appropriate theories as pointed out above.

As for hypotheses, eight hypotheses were proposed for this research.

3 Defining the methodological framework for conducting empirical

research to test the proposed hypotheses Met 4

Quantitative methodology was adopted for this research along with an online

survey targeting randomly ordinary citizens of the Kingdom of Bahrain through

using email, SMS and social media applications. In order to validate the

conceptual model and ensure reliability of the data, a pilot survey was conducted

prior conducting the main survey.

4 Analysing the empirical finding and highlighting the key relationships

between the different constructs proposed in the conceptual model Met 5

SPSS along with AMOS was used in this research for the data analysis. The SEM

was employed for this research as multivariate analysis technique. CFA and

path analysis were performed which resulted in a good fit of the proposed

conceptual model and supporting all hypotheses set for this research. The

findings of the research confirm that the model functions well.

5

Discussing the key findings in relation to the literature, outlining the

main theoretical and practical implications of the study and offering

suggestions for future research

Met 6,7

All findings were presented, discussed and mapped with the research questions

and hypotheses suggested for the research. A number of theoretical

contributions and practical implications were presented and discussed. The key

one is that as per the researcher’s knowledge this is the first study of its type that

investigates the relationship between transformation of government and

citizens’ trust and confidence in government. Furthermore, the proposed model

also makes a novel contribution at a conceptual level for the relationship

between transformation of government and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government.



7.8 Personal Experience and Lessons Learned from the Ph.D Journey

Before concluding this chapter, it is fit to share the experience that the researcher went through so

far as well as a number of lessons learned that might be useful for current and future researchers.

In the beginning, it is worth highlighting that the Ph.D journey is a very challenging one and can

be compared to bungee jumping. It includes professional work and all kinds of emotions and

feelings such as fear from the unknown, stress, energetic, enthusiasm, working hard,

disappointment, excitement, accomplishment and the desire to break through tough challenges.

The Ph.D project in hand was a real challenge for the researcher taking into account that he is

practitioner who has over 18 years of experience in industry and the move from industry and

business to an academic field / environment was a tough one.

The key message out of the Ph.D journey is the systematic process to be followed by researchers

for conducting and accomplishing different phases of research; through following this process, any

research can be conducted smoothly. The scope of this research was bounded by the time specified

to complete and submit the thesis; otherwise, many items could have been expanded on or new

tasks could have been included within the scope of the study. For example, other factors such as

cultural and social could have been included in the research and subsequently in the proposed

conceptual model. Moreover, a comparative study could have been conducted amongst the GCC

countries since all share a common culture and have a similar ICT environment. As for the research

methodology, a qualitative approach along with interviews and focus groups could have been used

for the purposes of confirming and validating the findings of the quantitative approach as well as

ensuring non-internet users were covered.

Although the target audience of this research were ordinary citizens living in Bahrain, responding

to the online survey was a real and hard challenge. Despite the large number of personal contacts,

the researcher has in Bahrain and using social media, only 313 completed responses were received;

in fact, the researcher expected over 1000 responses. Apart from the unexpected number of

responses, conducting data analysis using tools such as SPSS and AMOS was another difficulty.

In future, dedicated sessions provided by the academic institute on how to use SPSS and AMOS

at the early stages of the Ph.D journey would be very helpful and useful. Following over 18 years



of experience in the industry and with little knowledge about academia, the researcher faced

another challenge on adopting an academic writing style particularly during the early stages of the

research. This was gradually overcome by writing conference papers, converting these to journals

and constantly discussing research with the supervisory team. The way of thinking as an academic

was a completely different experience, in particular having to justify and refer to the literature

when proposing ideas or arguments. Finally, priorities in life as well as time management are the

most important elements that should be considered carefully by any researcher. The researcher had

completely changed his lifestyle and abandoned many hobbies and activities to accommodate the

Ph.D journey.

The researcher has benefited a lot from publishing conference papers and journal articles as well

as actively participating in academic events in different parts of the world. The critical feedback

received as part of the process to publish a conference paper and journal articles helped a lot in

improving the academic writing skills and way of thinking. In addition to the publications, the

relationship with the academic supervisors is a very important one for completing safely the Ph.D

journey. In addition to the regular skype and phone calls, the researcher met his academic

supervisor in many countries around the world such as the UK, USA, Bahrain and Qatar for only

one purpose, that is to have intellectual discussions about the research at hand and receive critical

feedback on the content of the research. When the researcher started his Ph.D journey, no plan was

there to publish or even think of publishing papers. However, the academic supervisor smartly

encouraged and pushed the researcher to publish over 10 conference and journal papers at the end

of his Ph.D journey.

Despite the above challenges and difficulties, starting this Ph.D journey was a personal choice and

the researcher had to navigate through the ups and down of this path. Personally, the Ph.D journey

was an exciting experience and unique one as well as being a fruitful and eventful one.



7.9 Chapter Summary

This research investigated the relationship between transformation of government and citizens’

trust and confidence in government. Findings of this research were presented and discussed in the

previous chapter. This chapter identified a number of research contributions as well as practical

implications to policy makers and practitioners. The research limitations and suggestions for future

research were presented and discussed.

As far as the researcher’s knowledge, this research is first of its type that investigates from citizens’

perspective the relationship between transformation and citizens’ trust and confidence in

government. In doing so, a conceptual model developed for this research was tested, validated and

proven functioning well. Again, as far as the researcher’s knowledge, this is the first conceptual

model of its type that investigates the relationship between the same concepts mentioned above.

Therefore, this research is considered as a novel contribution to the body of knowledge.

Finally, the five objectives identified for this research were accomplished successfully and this

means the aim of this research was successfully achieved.

References


REFERENCES

References


References

Abhichandani, T., Horan, T. A., and Rayalu, R. (2005) ‘EGOVSAT: Toward a Robust Measure of

E-Government Service Satisfaction in Transportation’, In D. Remenyi (Ed.), Proceedings of

the international conference on e-government (ICEG 2005), (p. 1-12). Red Hook, NY: Curran

Associates, Inc.

Abramson, Paul. (1983) Political Attitudes in America. San Francisco, CA: Freeman.

Abu-Shanab, E., and Al-Azzam, A. (2012) ‘Trust dimensions and the adoption of e-government

in Jordan’, International Journal of Information Communication Technologies and Human

Development (IJICTHD), 4 (1), pp. 39-51.

Albusaidy, M., and Weerakkody, V. (2008) ‘Factors influencing e-government implementation

progress in Oman: a discussion’, In Proceedings of the 2008 European and Mediterranean

Conference on Information Systems.

Alharbi, A., Kang, K., and Sohaib, O. (2016) ‘Citizens Engagement In E-Participation On

Egovernment Websites Through Swat Model: A Case Of Saudi Arabia’.

Al-Khouri, A. M. (2012) ‘eGovernment strategies the case of the United Arab Emirates (UAE)’,

European Journal of ePractice, (17), pp. 126-150.

Al Rub, Saeed. (2006) The impact of information technology on business performance

management (The study of the Affairs Agency of Sudanese working abroad for the period

(2000-2005), Master’s Thesis, University of Science and Technology, Omdurman, Sudan.

Alsaeed, A., Adams, C., and Boakes, R. (2014) ‘Challenges to The Successful Implementation Of

E-Government Initiatives In Middle-East Arabic Countries And Syria: Literature Review’, In

tGov workshop (Vol. 14).

Al-Shafi, S., and Weerakkody, V. (2010) ‘Factors affecting e-government adoption in the state of

Qatar’, Proceedings of the European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems,

Abu Dhabi, UAE, 12-13 April 2010.

Al-Shafi, S., and Weerakkody, V. (2008) ‘The use of wireless internet parks to facilitate adoption

and diffusion of e-government services: an empirical study in Qatar’, AMCIS 2008

Proceedings, 322.

Al-Shboul, M., Rababah, O., Ghnemat, R., and Al-Saqqa, S. (2014) ‘Challenges and Factors

Affecting the Implementation of E-Government in Jordan’, Journal of Software Engineering

and Applications, 7(13), pp. 1111.

Al-Sobhi, F., Weerakkody, V., and Kamal, M. M. (2010) ‘An exploratory study on the role of

intermediaries in delivering public services in Madinah City: Case of Saudi Arabia.

Transforming Government’, People, Process and Policy, 4(1), pp. 14-36.

References


Amaliah Said, I., Iaafar, N. H., and Atan, R. (2015) ‘Assessing Accountability in Government

Linked Companies: An Empirical Evidence’, International Business Management, 9(4), pp.

460-469.

Andersen, K. V., and Henriksen, H. Z. (2006) ‘E-Government maturity models: Extension of the

Layne and Lee model’, Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), pp. 236−248.

Anthopoulos, L., Reddick, C. G., Giannakidou, I., and Mavridis, N. (2016) ‘Why e-government

projects fail? An analysis of the Healthcare.gov website’, Government Information Quarterly,

33(1), pp. 161-173.

Arbuckle, J.L. and Wothke, W. (1999) Amos 4.0 user's guide (pp. 1995-2005). Chicago, IL:

SmallWaters Corporation.

Avison, D. E., Lau, F., Myers, M. D. and Nielsen, P. A. (1999) ‘Action research’. Communications

of the ACM, 42 (1), pp. 94-97.

Bannister, F., and Connolly, R. (2011) ‘Trust and transformational government: A proposed

framework for research’, Government Information Quarterly, 28(2), pp. 137-147.

Bartko, J.J. (1966) ‘The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability’,

Psychological reports. 19(1), pp. 3-11.

Baruch, Y. (1999) ‘Response rate in academic studies-A comparative analysis’, Human relations,

52(4), pp. 421-438.

Basu, S. (2004) ‘E‐government and developing countries: an overview’, International Review of

Law, Computers & Technology, 18(1), pp. 109-132.

Baum, C., and Di Maio, A. (2000) Gartner's four phases of e-Government. New York: Gartner

Group.

Bean, C. (2015) ‘Changing Citizen Confidence: Orientations towards Political and Social

Institutions in Australia, 1983-2010’, The Open Political Science Journal, 8(1), pp. 1-9.

Bearden, W. O., and J. E. Teal. (1983) ‘Selected determinants of consumer satisfaction and

complaint Reports’, Journal of Marketing Research, 20(1), pp. 21–28.

Bekkers, V., and Meijer, A. (2012) ‘A Meta-Theory of E-Government’, In 34th EGPA Conference

Proceedings.

Bélanger, F., and Carter, L. (2008) ‘Trust and risk in e-government adoption’, The Journal of

Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), pp. 165-176.

Bellamy, C., and Taylor, J. (1998) Governing in the Information Age. Buckingham, UK; Bristol,

PA: Open University Press.

References


Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., and Grimes, J. M. (2010) ‘Using ICTs to create a culture of

transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for

societies’, Government information quarterly, 27(3), pp. 264-271.

Bhattacherjee, A. (2012) Social science research: principles, methods, and practices.

Bingham, L. B. (2010). Online Deliberation and the United States Open Government Initiative,

Online Deliberation, 53.

Blunch, N. (2012) Introduction to structural equation modeling using IBM SPSS statistics and

AMOS. Sage.

Bonham, G., Seifert, J., and Thorson, S. (2001) ‘The transformational potential of e-Government:

The role of political leadership’, 4th Pan European International Relations Conference,

September 8–11, 2001, University of Kent, UK.

Bouckaert, G., Van de Walle, S., and Kampen, J. K. (2005) ‘Potential for comparative public

opinion research in public administration’, International Review of Administrative Sciences,

71(2), pp. 229-240.

Bovens, M., and Wille, A. (2008) ‘Deciphering the Dutch drop: Ten explanations for decreasing

political trust in The Netherlands’, International Review of Administrative Sciences. 74(2),

pp. 283−305

Brown, D. (1999) Information systems for improved performance management: Development

approaches in US public agency. In R. Heeks (Ed.), Reinventing government in the

information age (pp. 321−330), New York: Routledge.

Brown, J. D. (1996) Testing in language programs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Regents.

Bryman, A. (1992) ‘Quantitative and qualitative research: further reflections on their integration’,

Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research, 57-78.

Bryman, A. (2004) Social research methods. 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007) Business research methods. 2nd edn. Oxford University Press.

Burns, A.C. and Bush, R.F. (2006) ‘Marketing research’, Globalization, 1, pp.7.

Byrne, B.M. (2016) Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and

programming. Routledge.

Cabinet Office (2005) Transformational Government. London: Cabinet Office.

References


Cabrera-Nguyen, P. (2010) ‘Author guidelines for reporting scale development and validation

results’, Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 1(2), pp. 99-103.

Cadotte, E. R., R. B. Woodruff, and R. L. Jenkins. (1987) ‘Expectations and norms in models of

consumer satisfaction’, Journal of Marketing Research, 24(3), pp. 305–14.

Carter, L., and Bélanger, F. (2005) ‘The utilization of e‐government services: citizen trust,

innovation and acceptance factors’, Information Systems Journal, 15(1), pp. 5-25.

Carter, L., and Weerakkody, V. (2008) ‘E-government adoption: A cultural comparison’,

Information Systems Frontiers, 10(4), pp. 473-482.

Chan, C. M. L., Shan-Ling, P. and Tan, C.-W. (2003) ‘Managing Stakeholder Relationships in an

e-government project’, Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Florida.

Chen, W., and Hirschheim, R. (2004) ‘A paradigmatic and methodological examination of

information systems research from 1991 to 2001’, Information systems journal, 14(3), pp.

197-235.

Chen, K. C., Wei, K. C., and Chen, Z. (2003) ‘Disclosure, corporate governance, and the cost of

equity capital: evidence from Asia's emerging markets’, Corporate Governance, and the Cost

of Equity Capital: Evidence from Asia's Emerging Markets, Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.422000.

Chatfield, A. T. (2009) ‘Public service reform through e-government: a case study of ‘e-Tax’ in

Japan’, Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(2), 135–146.

Choi, H., Park, M. J., Rho, J. J., and Zo, H. (2016) ‘Rethinking the assessment of e-government

implementation in developing countries from the perspective of the design–reality gap:

Applications in the Indonesian e-procurement system’, Telecommunications Policy, 40(7),

pp. 644-660.

Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., Roness, P. G., and Røvik, K. A. (2007) Organization theory and the

public sector: Instrument, culture and myth. Routledge.

Churchill Gilbert, A. and Dawn, I. (1999) Marketing research: methodological foundations.

Cengage Learning, vol. 9.

Churchill, G.A., and Lacobucci, D. (2004) Marketing research: Methodological foundations. 9th

edn. Ohio: Thomson South-Western.

Churchill, G. A., Jr., and C. Surprenant. (1982) ‘An investigation into the determinants of customer

satisfaction’, Journal of Marketing Research, 19 (4), pp. 491–504.

Colesca, S. E. (2009) ‘Understanding trust in e-government’, Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering

Economics. 3(3), pp. 7-15.

https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.422000

References


Collis, J and Hussey, R. (2003) Business research: a practical guide for undergraduate and

postgraduate students. 2nd ed. Palgrave macmillan.

Comrey, A. and Lee, H. (1992) A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.

Coursey, D., and Norris, D. F. (2008) ‘Models of e-Government: Are they correct? An empirical

assessment’, Public Administration Review, 68(3), pp. 523−536.

Creswell, J. W. (2003) Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches.

Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publication, Inc.

Dalton, R. J. (2005) ‘The social transformation of trust in government’, International Review of

Sociology, 15(1), pp. 133-154.

Das Aundhe, M., Das Aundhe, M., Narasimhan, R., and Narasimhan, R. (2016) ‘Public private

partnership (PPP) outcomes in e-government–a social capital explanation’, International

Journal of Public Sector Management, 29(7), pp. 638-658.

Dashti, A., Benbasat, I., and Burton-Jones, A. (2009) ‘Developing trust reciprocity in electronic-

government: The role of felt trust’, In Proc. Eur. Mediterranean Conference Information

Systems, Izmir, Turkey, (pp. 1-13).

De Fine Licht, Jenny. (2011) ‘Do We Really Want to Know? The Potentially Negative Effect of

Transparency in Decision Making on Perceived Legitimacy’, Scandinavian Political Studies,

34(3), pp. 183–201.

Demchak, C. C., Friis, C., and La Porte, T. M. (2000) ‘Webbing governance: National differences

in constructing the public face’, In G. D. Garson (Ed.), Handbook of public Information

Systems, New York, Marcel Dekker.

Denscombe, M. (2003) The good research guide Maidenhead.

Dharma, M. (2015) The contribution of e-government to trust in the government: correlating trust

in the government with satisfaction with e-service by using transparency, responsiveness,

accessibility, and security as determinants. University of Twente Student Theses.

DiMaggio, P. J., and Powell, W.W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and

collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, (48), pp.

147−160.

Dommeyer, C. J., Baum, P., Chapman, K. S., and Hanna, R. W. (2002) ‘Attitudes of business

faculty towards two methods of collecting teaching evaluations: Paper vs. online’, Assessment

& Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), pp. 455-462.

References


Donnelly, M., M. Wisniewski, J. Dalrymple, and A. Curry. (1995) ‘Measuring service quality in

local government: The SERVQUAL approach’, International Journal of Public Sector

Management, (8), pp. 15–20.

Edwards, Meredith. (2015) The trust deficit - concepts and causes of low public trust in

governments. Committee of Experts on Public Administration, Fourteenth session, 20-24

April 2015, Item 3 of the provisional agenda.

European Commission (2015) eGovernment in the European Union 2015.

Fang, Z. (2002) ‘E-government in digital era: concept, practice, and development’, International

journal of the Computer, the Internet and management, 10(2), pp. 1-22.

Field, A. (2006) Discovering statistics using SPSS.2nd ed. London: Sage.

Field, A. (2013) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.

Florini, A. (2000) ‘Does the invisible hand need a transparent glove? The politics of transparency’

World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics, 163−184.

Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. (1981) ‘Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable

variables and measurement error’, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), pp. 39–50.

Fornell, C., M. D. Johnson, E. W. Anderson, J. Cha, and B. E. Bryant. (1996) ‘The American

customer satisfaction index: Nature, purpose and findings’, Journal of Marketing, 60(4), pp.

7–18.

Fornell, C., S. Mithas, and F. V. MorgesonIII. (2009a) ‘Commentary - The economic and statistical

significance of stock returns on customer satisfaction’, Marketing Science, (28), pp. 820–25.

Fornell, C., S. Mithas, and F. V. MorgesonIII. (2009b) ‘The statistical significance of Portfolio

returns’, International Journal of Research in Marketing, (26), pp. 162–3.

Fountain, J. (2001) Building the virtual state: Information technology and institutional change.

Washington, DC7: Brookings Institution Press.

Fowler, F. J. Jr. (2002) Survey research methods. Sage Publications Inc., London.

Freeman, R. E. (2010) Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge University

Press.

Fukuyama, F. (1995) Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: free

Press.

Gable, G. G. (1994) ‘Integrating case study and survey research methods: an example in

information systems’, European Journal of Information Systems, 3(2), pp. 112-126.

References


Garcia-Murillo, M. (2013) ‘Does a government web presence reduce perceptions of corruption?’,

Information Technology for Development, 19(2), 151–175.

Gefen, D., Straub, D. and Boudreau, M.C. (2000) ‘Structural equation modeling and regression:

Guidelines for research practice’, Communications of the association for information systems.

4(1), p.7.

Gilmour, P., B. Coffey, and K. O’Toole. (2015) ‘Trust and knowledge exchange in coastal

settings’, Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs. 7(1), pp. 66-74.

Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Gilbert, D., and Balestrini, P. (2004) ‘Barriers and benefits in the adoption of e-Government’, The

International Journal of Public Sector Management, 17(4), pp. 286-301.

Graham, M., and Avery, E. J. (2013) ‘Government public relations and social media: An analysis

of the perceptions and trends of social media use at the local government level’, Public

Relations Journal, 7(4), pp. 1-21.

Gray, R., Owen, D. L. and Maunders, K. (1987) Corporate social reporting: accounting and

accountability. Hemel Hempstead, Herts, Prentice-Hall International.

Green, S.B. and Salkind, N.J. (2010) Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and

understanding data. Prentice Hall Press.

Gregor, S. (2006) ‘The nature of theory in information systems’, MIS quarterly. pp.611-642.

Grimmelikhuijsen, Stephan G. (2012a) ‘A Good Man but a Bad Wizard: About the Limits and

Future of Transparency of Democratic Governments’, Information Polity, 17(3–4), pp. 293–

302.

Grimmelikhuijsen, S. (2009) ‘Do transparent government agencies strengthen trust?’, Information

Polity, 14(3), pp. 173-186

Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Porumbescu, G., Hong, B. and Im, T. (2013) ‘The effect of transparency on

trust in government: A cross‐national comparative experiment’, Public Administration

Review, 73(4), pp.575-586.

Groves, R. M., Fowler Jr, F. J. and Couper, M. P. (2004) Survey methodology. Wiley-IEEE.

Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of

qualitative research, 2, pp. 163-194.

Gunawong, P., and Gao, P. (2017) ‘Understanding e-government failure in the developing country

context: a process-oriented study’, Information Technology for Development, 23(1), pp.153-

178.

References


Hair, J.F., Tatham, R.L., Anderson, R.E. and Black, W. (2006) Multivariate data analysis. Pearson

Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Babin, B. J., and Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A

global perspective. Vol. 7. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Halkett, G.K. and Kristjanson, L.J. (2007) ‘Validity and reliability testing of two instruments to

measure breast cancer patients' concerns and information needs relating to radiation therapy’,

Radiation Oncology. 2(1), p.43.

Hameed, S., and Al-Shawabkah, A. (2013) ‘Role of E-Government in Improving Organizational

Performance in the Civil Status and Passports Department of Jordan’, Developing Country

Studies, 3(5), pp. 50-64.

Hanna N., (2009) e-Transformation: Enabling New Development Strategies. Springer Science &

Business Media.

Hazlett, S. A., and Hill, F. (2003) ‘E-government: the realities of using IT to transform the public

sector, Managing Service Quality’, An International Journal, 13(6), pp. 445-452.

Heintzman, R., and Marson, B. (2005) ‘People, service and trust: is there a public sector service

value chain?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 71(4), pp. 549-575.

Henson, R.K. and Roberts, J.K. (2006) ‘Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research:

Common errors and some comment on improved practice’. Educational and Psychological

measurement. 66(3), pp.393-416.

Hess, A.M., and Hess, M.F (2016) ‘The Consequences of Governance Failure for Innovation’,

Working Paper, Washington and Lee University.

Hiller, J. S., and Belanger, F. (2001) Privacy Strategies for Electronic Government. E-government

series. The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government, Available

at http://www.businessofgovernment.org/ pdfs/HillerReport.pdf.

Hirschman, A. O. (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations,

and states. Vol. 25. Harvard university press.

Hong H. (2013) ‘Government websites and social media’s influence on government-public

relationships’, Public Relations Review, 39(4), pp. 346– 356.

Hood, Christopher. (2006) Beyond Exchanging First Principles? Some Closing Comments. In

Transparency: The Key to Better Governance?. Edited by Christopher Hood and David

Heald, 211–26. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. and Mullen, M. (2008) ‘Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for

determining model fit’, Articles. p.2.

References


Howe, K. R. (1988) ‘Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die

hard’, Educational researcher, 17 (8), pp. 10-16.

Hox, J. J., and Bechger, T. M. (1998) ‘An introduction to structural equation modelling’, Family

Science Review, (11), pp. 354-373.

Hu, L.-T., and Bentler, P. M. (1999) ‘Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:

Conventional criteria versus new alternatives’, Structural Equation Modelling, (6), pp.1–55.

Hudson, J. (2006) ‘Institutional trust and subjective well-being across the EU’, Kyklos. 59(1), pp.

43−62.

Huse, M. (2005) ‘Accountability and creating accountability: A framework for exploring

behavioural perspectives of corporate governance’, British Journal of Management, 16(s1),

pp.S65-S79.

Iacobucci, D. (2010) ‘Structural equations modeling: Fit indices, sample size, and advanced

topics’. Sample Size, and Advanced Topics.

International Labour Office. (2015) World Employment and Social Outlook: Trends 2015.

International Labour Organization.





ISEA. (1999) Accountability 1000. London: Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability.

Jackson, D. L., Gillaspy Jr, J. A., and Purc-Stephenson, R. (2009) ‘Reporting practices in

confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations’, Psychological

methods, 14(1), pp. 6.

James, O. (2009) ‘Evaluating the expectations disconfirmation and expectations anchoring

approaches to citizen satisfaction with local public services’, Journal of Public Administration

Research and Theory, 19(1), pp. 107–23.

Janssen, M., and Shu, W. (2008) ‘Transformational government: Basics and key issues: A

workshop’, Proceedings of ICEGOV 2008. December 1–4, Cairo, Egypt (pp. 117−122).

Javali, S.B., Gudaganavar, N.V. and Raj, S.M. (2011) ‘Effect of varying sample size in estimation

of coefficients of internal consistency’.

Jick, T. D. (1979) ‘Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action’,

Administrative science quarterly, 24 (4), pp. 602-611.

References


Job, J. (2005) ‘How is trust in government created? It begins at home, but ends in the parliament’,

The Australian Review of Public Affairs. 6(1), pp. 1−23.

Johnson, B., and Christensen, L. (2008) Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and

mixed approaches. Sage.

Johnson, R. B., and Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) ‘Mixed methods research: A research paradigm

whose time has come,. Educational researcher, 33(7), pp. 14-26.

Jones, E. E., and Nisbett, R. E. (1971) The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the

causes of behavior.

Kaplan, B. and Duchon, D. (1988) ‘Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in information

systems research: a case study’, MIS Quarterly, 571-586.

Kampen, J. K., Maddens, B., Vermunt, J. K., and Salminen, A. (2003) ‘Trust and satisfaction: A

Case study of the Micro-Performance’, In Salminen, A. (Ed.), Governing networks: Networks:

EGPA Yearbook (319-326), Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Kampen, J. K., De Walle, S. V., and Bouckaert, G. (2006) ‘Assessing the Relation Between

Satisfaction with Public Service Delivery and Trust in Government. The Impact of the

Predisposition of Citizens toward Government on Evaluations of Its Performance’, Public

Performance & Management Review, 29(4), pp. 387-404.

Kauvar, G. (1998) ‘Electronic government: Concepts, visions, and strategies’, The KAPAs

International Symposium on Electronic Government: Visions and strategies, Seoul, Korea.

Kayam, O., and Hirsch, T. (2012) ‘Using social media networks to conduct questionnaire based

research in social studies case study: Family language policy’, Journal of Sociological

Research, 3(2), pp. 57-67.

Kelley, H. H. (1973) ‘The processes of causal attribution,” American psychologist, 28(2), pp. 107.

Khalil, O. E. (2011) ‘e-Government readiness: does national culture matter?’, Government

Information Quarterly, 28(3), pp. 388-399.

Khan, A. (2016) ‘Central Bank Governance and the Role of Nonfinancial Risk Management’,

Working Paper, International Monetary Fund.

Kim, S., Kim, H. J., and Lee, H. (2009) ‘An institutional analysis of an e-government system for

anti-corruption: The case of OPEN’, Government Information Quarterly, 26(1), pp. 42-50.

Kline, R. (2005) Principles and practice of structural equation modelling. 2nd ed. New York, NY:

Guilford Press.

References


Lai, Y.-L., L. Cao, and J. S. Zhao. (2010) ‘The impact of political entity on confidence in legal

authorities: a comparison between China and Taiwan’, Journal of Criminal Justice 38(5):934-

941. Layne, K., and Lee, J. (2001) ‘Developing fully functional e-Government’. Government

Information Quarterly, 18(2), pp. 122−136.

Lee, J. (2007) ‘Search for stage theory in e-government development’, Innovation and the Public

Sector. (13), pp. 33–48.

Lee, J., Lee, J. N., and Tan, B. C. (2015) ‘Antecedents of cognitive trust and affective distrust and

their mediating roles in building customer loyalty’, Information Systems Frontiers, 17(1), pp.

159-175.

Lee Rodgers, J. and Nicewander, W.A. (1988), ‘Thirteen ways to look at the correlation

coefficient’, The American Statistician. 42(1), pp. 59-66.

Li, D. X. (1999) Value at Risk based on the Volatility. Skewness and Kurtosis. RiskMetrics Group.

Luna-Reyes, L. F., and Gil-García, J. R. (2011) ‘Using institutional theory and dynamic simulation

to understand complex e-Government phenomena’, Government Information Quarterly,

28(3), pp. 329-345.

Maddox, William, and Stuart Lilie. (1984) Beyond Liberal and Conservative. Washington, DC:

Cato Institute.

Mahmood, M. (2016) ‘Enhancing Citizens' Trust and Confidence in Government through Digital

Transformation’, International Journal of Electronic Government Research. 12(1).

Mahmood, M., Osmani, M., and Sivarajah, U. (2014) ‘The Role of Trust in E-Government

Adoption: A Systematic Literature Review’, Proceedings of the 20th Americas Conference

on Information Systems.

Mahmood, and Weerakkody. (2014) ‘Digital government diffusion in Bahrain – the role of trust

and its influence on adoption’, Proceedings of the European, Mediterranean & Middle

Eastern Conference on Information Systems, 2014.

Mahmood, M., and Weerakkody, V. (2016) ‘Factors Affecting Citizens’ Trust and Confidence in

Government and Its Relation with Transformation of Government’, 22nd Americas

Conference on Information Systems.

Malhotra, N. and Birks, D. (2007) Marketing Research: an applied approach. 3rd edn. European

Edition, Pearson Education.

McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V. and Kacmar, C. 2002 ‘Developing and validating trust measures

for e-commerce: An integrative typology’, Information systems research, 13(3), pp.334-359.

References


McNeal, R., Hale, K., and Dotterweich, L. (2008) ‘Citizen–government interaction and the

Internet: Expectations and accomplishments in contact, quality, and trust’, Journal of

Information Technology & Politics, 5(2), pp. 213-229.

Meijer, A. J., Koops, B. J., Pieterson, W., Overman, S., and Tije, S. (2012) ‘Government 2.0: Key

challenges to its realization’, Electronic Journal of e-Government, 10(1), pp. 59-69.

Merolli, M., Sanchez, F. J. M., and Gray, K. (2014) ‘Social media and online survey: tools for

knowledge management in health research’, In Proceedings of the Seventh Australasian

Workshop on Health Informatics and Knowledge Management, (153), pp. 21-29. Australian

Computer Society, Inc.

Mingers, J. (2001) ‘Combining IS research methods: towards a pluralist methodology’,

Information systems research, 12(3), pp. 240-259.

Mingers, J. (2003) ‘The paucity of multi-method research: A review of the information systems

literature’, Information Systems Journal, 13(3), pp.233-249.

Miyata, M. (2011) ‘Measuring impacts of e-government support in least developed countries: a

case study of the vehicle registration service in Bhutan’. Information Technology for

Development, 17(2), pp.133-152.

Moon, M.J. and Norris, D.F. (2005) ‘Does managerial orientation matter? The adoption of

reinventing government and e‐government at the municipal level’, Information Systems

Journal, 15(1), pp.43-60.

Morgeson, F.V. (2013) ‘Expectations, disconfirmation, and citizen satisfaction with the US federal

government: Testing and expanding the model’, Journal of Public Administration Research

and Theory, 23(2), pp.289-305.

Morgeson, F. V., and Petrescu, C. (2011) ‘Do they all perform alike? An examination of perceived

performance, citizen satisfaction and trust with US federal agencies’, International Review of

Administrative Sciences, 77(3), pp. 451-479.

Morgeson, F. V., VanAmburg, D., and Mithas, S. (2011) ‘Misplaced trust? Exploring the structure

of the e-government-citizen trust relationship’, Journal of Public Administration Research

and Theory, 21(2), pp. 257-283.

Mukhoryanova, O. A., Novikova, I. V., Rudich, S. B., and Bogushevich, E. V. (2016)

‘E-Government in the Western European Countries, Asia and in the USA’, Indian Journal of

Science and Technology, 9(16).

Mungiu-Pippidi, A., Dadašov, R., Fazekas, M., Tóth, I.J., Kocsis, G., Jancsis, D., Kortas, A.M.,

Kukutschka, R.M.B., Stefavov, R. and Skolkay, A. (2016) Public Integrity and Trust in

Europe.

References


Muthen, L.K., and Muthen, B.O. (2002) ‘How to use a Monte Carlo study to decide on sample

size and determine power’, Structural Equation Modelling, 9(4), pp.599-620.

Myeong, S., Kwon, Y., and Seo, H., (2014) ‘Sustainable E-Governance: The Relationship among

Trust, Digital Divide, and E-Government’, Sustainability, 6(9), 6049–6069.

Myers, M.D. and Avison, D. (1997) ‘Qualitative research in information systems’, Management

Information Systems Quarterly, (21), pp.241-242.

Nam, T. (2012) ‘Citizens’ attitudes toward Open Government and Government 2.0’, International

Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(2), 346-368.

Nam, T., and Sayogo, D. S. (2011) ‘Who uses e-government?: examining the digital divide in e-

government use’, In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Theory and Practice

of Electronic Governance, (pp. 27-36), ACM.

Navarrete, C. (2010) ‘Trust in E-Government Transactional Services: A Study of Citizens'

Perceptions in Mexico and the US’, In System Sciences (HICSS), 2010 43rd Hawaii

International Conference on (pp. 1-10), IEEE.

Neuman, W.L. (2006) ‘Analysis of qualitative data’, Social research methods: Qualitative and

quantitative approaches, pp.457-489.

Northrup, T. A., and Thorson, S. J. (2003) ‘The Web of governance and democratic

accountability’, Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System

Sciences.

Norquist, G. (2007) ‘Transparency: The new democracy’, Financial Times, Retrieved from

www.ft.com/cms/s/2/2206f20c-45c9- 11dc-b359-0000779fd2ac.html#axzz1CiOFLwDp.

Nunnally, J. C. and Bernstein, I. H. (1994) Psychometric theory (3rd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nye, Joseph, Philip Zelikow, and David King. (1997) Why People Don’t Trust Government.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Nye, J. (1997) ‘In government we don't trust’, Foreign Policy, (108), 99−111.

Ogier, J. (2005) ‘The response rates for online surveys—a hit and miss affair’, 2005 Australasian

Evaluations Forum: University Learning and Teaching: Evaluating and Enhancing the

Experience, UNSW, Sydney, 28–29 November.

Oliver, R. L. (1980) ‘A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction

decisions’, Journal of Marketing Research. 17, pp. 460–9.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/2206f20c-45c9-

References


Omar, A., Weerakkody, V. and Sivarajah, U. (2017) ‘Digitally enabled service transformation in

UK public sector: a case analysis of universal credit’, International Journal of Information

Management, 37(4), pp. 350-356.

O'Hara, K. (2012) ‘Transparency, open data and trust in government: shaping the infosphere’, In

Proceedings of the 4th Annual ACM Web Science Conference, (pp. 223-232), ACM.

O'Neill, R. (2009), ‘The Transformative Impact Of E-Government On Public Governance In New

Zealand’, Public Management Review, 11(6), pp. 751-770.

O’Neill, Onora. (2002) A Question of Trust: The BBC Reith Lectures 2002. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) ‘The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in

organizations’, Organization Science, 3(3), pp. 398−427.

Orlikowski, W.J. (2000) ‘Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for

Studying Technology in Organizations’, Organization Science, 11 (4), pp. 404-428.

Orlikowski, W.J. and Baroudi, J.J. (1991) ‘Studying information technology in organizations:

Research approaches and assumptions’, Information systems research, 2(1), pp.1-28.

Orlikowski, W. J., Yates, J., Okamura, K. and Fujimoto, M. (1995) ‘Shaping electronic

communication: The metastructuring of technology in the context of use’, Organization

Science, 6(4), pp. 423−44.

Orren, G. (1997) Fall from grace: The public’s loss of faith in government. In Why people don’t

trust government. eds. J. Nye, Jr., P. Zelikow, and D. King. Harvard University Press.

Osman, I. H., Anouze, A., Irani, Z., Lee, H., Balcı, A., Medeni, T., and Weerakkody, V. (2011) ‘A

new cobras framework to evaluate e-government services: a citizen centric perspective’,

In Tgovernment workshop.

Pallant, J. (2010) SPSS Survival Manual. 4th ed. Australia: Allen and Unwin Book Publishers.

Pallant, J. (2013) SPSS survival manual. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

Parasuraman, A., L. L. Berry, and V. A. Zeithaml. (1991) ‘Refinement and reassessment of the

SERVQUAL scale’, Journal of Retailing, (67), pp.420–50.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, Valerie A. and Berry, Leonard L. (1988) ‘SERVQUAL: a multiple-

item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality’, Journal of Retailing, 64(1),

pp. 12-40.

References


Pardo, T. A. and Scholl, H. J. (2002) ‘Walking atop the cliffs: avoiding failure and avoiding risk

in large scale e-government projects’, In Hawai'i International Conference on System

Sciences.

Park, H., and Blenkinsopp, J. (2011) ‘The roles of transparency and trust in the relationship

between corruption and citizen satisfaction’, International Review of Administrative

Sciences, 77(2), pp. 254-274.

Patterson, M. G., West, M. A., Shackleton, V. J., Dawson, J. F., Lawthom, R., Maitlis, S., and

Wallace, A. M. (2005) ‘Validating the organizational climate measure: links to managerial

practices, productivity and innovation’, Journal of organizational behavior, 26(4), pp. 379-

408.

Peters, B. G. (1999) American public policy: Promise and performance. 5th ed. New York:

Chatham House.

Phillips, E., and Pugh, D. (2010) How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors.

McGraw-Hill International.

Pigott, T. D. (2001) A review of methods for missing data. Educational Research and Evaluation,

7(4), pp. 353-383

Pina, V., Torres, L., and Royo, S. (2009) ‘E-government evolution in EU local governments: a

comparative perspective’, Online Information Review, 33(6), pp. 1137-1168.

Poister, T. H., and G. T. Henry. (1994) ‘Citizen ratings of public and private service quality: A

comparative perspective’, Public Administration Review, 54(2), pp. 155–60.

Punch, K. (2005) Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches. 2nd

edn. London: Sage.

Reddick, C. and Anthopoulos, L. (2014) ‘Interactions with e-government, new digital media and

traditional channel choices: citizen-initiated factors’, Transforming Government: People,

Process and Policy, 8(3), pp.398-419.

Richardson, H. and Robinson, B. (2007) ‘The mysterious case of the missing paradigm: a review

of critical information systems research 1991-2001’, Information Systems Journal, 17(3), pp.

251-270.

Roberts, Alasdair. (2006) Governmental Adaptation to Transparency Rules. In Transparency: The

Key to Better Governance?. Edited by Christopher Hood and David Heald, 107–44. Oxford,

UK: Oxford University Press.

Robey, D. (1996) ‘Research commentary: diversity in information systems research: threat,

promise, and responsibility’, Information Systems Research, 7(4), pp.400-408.

References


Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., and Wrightsman, L. S. (1991) Criteria for scale selection and

evaluation. Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes, 1(3), pp. 1-16.

Rodrigues, G., Sarabdeen, J., and Balasubramanian, S. (2016) ‘Factors that Influence Consumer

Adoption of E-government Services in the UAE: A UTAUT Model Perspective’, Journal of

Internet Commerce, 15(1), pp.18-39.

Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P., Alcaide Muñoz, L., and López Hernández, A. M. (2016) ‘Scientometric

study of the progress and development of e-government research during the period 2000–

2012’, Information Technology for Development, 22(1), pp.36-74.

Robson, C. (2002) Real word research. Oxford: Blackwell.

Salmi, M., and Hasnan, N. (2016) ‘E-Government Technology Acceptance analysis of Citizens:

Sultanate of Oman Case’, International Journal of Social Relevance & Concern, 4(1), pp. 13-

26.

Sargeant, A., and Lee, S. (2002) ‘Improving public trust in the voluntary sector: An empirical

Analysis’, International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing. 7(1), pp. 68-83.

Sauermann, H. and Roach, M. (2013) ‘Increasing web survey response rates in innovation

research: An experimental study of static and dynamic contact design features’, Research

Policy, 42(1), pp. 273-286.

Saunders, M. N. (2011) Research methods for business students. 5/e. Pearson Education India.

Saunders, M.N., Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2011) Research methods for business

students. 5th edn. Pearson Education India.

Scharpf, F. (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic. Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Scholl, H. J. (2001) ‘Applying stakeholder theory to e-government’, In Schmidt, B., Stanoevska-

Slabeva, K., & Tschammer, V. (Eds.), Towards the e-society: e-commerce, e-business and e-

government. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Schumacker, R.E. and Lomax, R.G. (2004) A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling.

Psychology Press.

Scott, M., Golden, W., and Hughes, M. (2004) ‘The implementation of citizen-centred e-

government: A stakeholder viewpoint’, Working Paper, Centre for Innovation & Structural

Change, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.

Scott, W. R. (2001) Institutions and organizations. London: Sage Publications.

References


Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., and King, J. (2006) ‘Reporting structural

equation modelling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review’, The Journal of

educational research, 99(6), pp. 323-338.

Sehli, H., Cooper, V., and Sarkar, P. (2016) ‘The Role of Culture in Developing the E-Government

Absorptive Capacity of Agencies In Saudi Arabia: A Conceptual Model’, PACIS 2016

Proceedings.

Seifert, J. W., and Chung, J. (2009) ‘Using E-Government to Reinforce Government – Citizen

Relationships: Comparing Government Reform in the United States and China’, Social

Science Computer Review, 27(1), pp. 3–23.

Seifert, J. W., and Petersen, R. E. (2002) ‘The promise of all things E? Expectations and challenges

of emergent electronic government’, Perspectives on Global Development and Technology,

1(2), pp. 193-212.

Sekaran, U. (2000) Research Methods for Business: A Skill-building Approach. USA: John Willey

& Sons.

Sekaran, U. (2003) Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. 4th edn. John Wiley

and Sons, Inc: New York.

Shafi, A. S., and Weerakkody, V. (2009) ‘Understanding citizens' behavioural intention in the

adoption of e-government services in the state of Qatar’, In ECIS (pp. 1618-1629).

Sharma, S. K., Govindaluri, S. M., and Gattoufi, S. (2015) ‘Understanding and predicting the

quality determinants of e-government services: A two-staged regression-neural network

model’, Journal of Modelling in Management, 10(3), pp. 325-340.

Siddique, W. (2016) ‘Critical Success Factors Affecting E-Government Policy Implementation in

Pakistan’. JeDEM-eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 8(1), pp. 102-126.

Sidorova, A., Evangelopoulos, N., Valacich, J.S. and Ramakrishnan, T. (2008) ‘Uncovering the

intellectual core of the information systems discipline’, MIS Quarterly, 32(3), pp.467-482.

Siau, K., and Long, Y. (2005) ‘Synthesizing e‐government stage models – a meta‐synthesis based

on meta‐ethnography approach’, Industrial Management & Data Systems. 105(4), 443–458.

Smith, R., and Bertozzi, M. (1998) ‘Principals and agents: An explanatory model for public

budgeting. Journal of Public Budgeting’, Accounting and Financial Management, 10(3), pp.

325−353.

Song, C., and Lee, J. (2013) ‘Can social media restore citizen trust in government?’, In Public

Management Research Conference, Madison, WI, pp. 20-22.

References


Srivastava, S. C., and Teo, T. S. (2009) ‘Citizen trust development for e-government adoption and

usage: Insights from young adults in Singapore’, Communications of the Association for

Information Systems. (25).

Straub, D., Boudreau, M. C. and Gefen, D. (2004) ‘Validation guidelines for IS positivist research’,

Communications of the Association for Information Systems, (13), pp. 380-427.

Suhr, D. (2006) The basics of structural equation modeling. Presented: Irvine, CA, SAS User

Group of the Western Region of the United States (WUSS).

Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., and Osterlind, S. J. (2001) Using multivariate statistics. New

York: Pearson.

Taylor, R. (1990) ‘Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: a basic review’, Journal of

diagnostic medical sonography, 6(1), pp.35-39.

Tennert, J. R. and Schroeder, A. D. (1999) Stakeholder Analysis. Paper presented at the 60th

Annual Meeting of the American Society for Public Administration, Orlando, Florida.

Teo, T. S., Srivastava, S. C., and Jiang, L. (2008) ‘Trust and electronic government success: an

empirical study’, Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(3), pp. 99-132.

Thompson, B. (2004) Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and

applications. American Psychological Association.

Tolbert, C. J., and Mossberger, K. (2006) ‘The Effects of E‐Government on Trust and Confidence

in Government’, Public Administration Review, 66(3), pp. 354-369.

Toppe, C., and Kirsh, A. D. (2003) Keeping the trust: Confidence in charitable organizations in

an age of scrutiny. Washington, DC: Independent Sector.

United Nations. (2012) E-Government Survey 2012: e-Government for the People. Department of

Economic and Social Affairs Division for Public Administration and Development

Management.

United Nations. (2014) E-Government Survey 2014: e-Government for the Future We Want.

Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Public Administration and

Development Management.

United Nations. (2016) E-Government Survey 2016: e-Government in Support of Sustainable

Development. Department of Economic and Social Affairs Division for Public Administration

and Development Management.

Uslaner, Eric M. (2001) Is Washington Really the Problem?” In What is it About Government

that Americans Dislike?. eds., John R. Hibbing and Elizabeth Thesis-Morse. New York,

NY: Cambridge University Press.

References


Van de Walle, S., and Bouckaert, G. (2003) ‘Public service performance and trust in government:

the problem of causality’, International Journal of Public Administration, 26(8-9), pp. 891-

913.

Van de Walle, S., Van Roosbroek, S., and Bouckaert, G. (2008) ‘Trust in the public sector: is there

any evidence for a long-term decline?’, International Review of Administrative Sciences,

74(1), pp. 47-64.

Van Ryzin, G. G., D. Muzzio, S. Immerwahr, L. Gulick, and E. Martinez. (2004b) ‘Drivers and

consequences of citizen satisfaction: An application of the American customer satisfaction

index model to New York City’, Public Administration Review, 64(3), pp. 331–41.

Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., and Bala, H. (2013) Bridging the qualitative-quantitative.

Venkatraman, N. and Grant, J.H. (1986) ‘Construct Measurement in Organizational Strategy

Research: A Critique and Proposal’, The Academy of Management Review, 11(1), pp. 71-87.

W Creswell, J. (2009) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.

SAGE Publications. Incorporated.

Waller, P. and Weerakkody, V. (2016) ‘Digital Government: overcoming the systemic failure of

transformation’, Working Paper 2, London: Brunel University.

Walsham, G. (1995b) ‘Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method’, European

Journal of Information Systems, 4, pp. 74-81.

Walsham, G. (2006) ‘Doing interpretive research’, European journal of information systems,

15(3), pp.320-330.

Weber, R. (2004) ‘The Rhetoric of Positivism Versus Interpretivism: A Personal View’, MIS

Quarterly, 28 (1), pp. iii-xii.

Welch, E. W., Hinnant, C. C., and Moon, M. J. (2005) ‘Linking citizen satisfaction with e-

government and trust in government’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory,

15(3), pp.371-391.

Weerakkody, V., El-Haddadeh, R., Al-Sobhi, F., Shareef, M. A., and Dwivedi, Y. K. (2013)

‘Examining the influence of intermediaries in facilitating e-government adoption: An

empirical investigation’, International Journal of Information Management, 33(5), pp. 716-

725.

Weerakkody, V., Janssen, M., and Dwivedi, Y. (Eds.). (2009) Handbook of research on ICT

enabled transformational government: A global perspective. Hershey, PA: Information

Science Reference.

References


Weerakkody V, Omar A, El-Haddadeh, R. (2016) ‘Digitally-enabled service transformation in the

public sector: The lure of institutional pressure and strategic response towards change’.

Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), pp.658-668.

West, D. M. (2004) ‘E‐Government and the Transformation of Service Delivery and Citizen

Attitudes’, Public administration review, 64(1), pp. 15-27.

Williams, B., Onsman, A. and Brown, T. (2010) ‘Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide

for novices’, Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3).

Williams, P. F. (1987) ‘The legitimate concern with fairness', Accounting, Organizations and

Society, 12(2), pp. 169-189.

Wolak, J., and Palus, C. K. (2010) ‘The dynamics of public confidence in US state and local

government’, State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 10(4), pp. 421-445.

Wood, M., and Welch, C. (2010) ‘Are ‘Qualitative’ and ‘Quantitative’ Useful Terms for

Describing Research?’, Methodological Innovations Online, 5(1), 56-71.

World Bank. (2010) Results, Performance Budgeting and Trust in Government. Washington.

Worthington, R., and Whittaker, T. (2006) Scale development research: A content analysis and

recommendations for best practices. Counseling Psychologist, (34), pp. 806-838.

Yamin, M., and Mattar, R. (2016) ‘e-Government in Saudi Arabia-An Empirical Study’,

BVICAM's International Journal of Information Technology, 8(1), 944–949.

Yigitcanlar, T. (2003) ‘Bridging the gap between citizens and local authorities via e-government’,

In Symposium on E-government (pp. 10-12).

Yin, R. K. (2003) Applications of case study research. Newbury Park, CA, EUA: SAGE.

Yin, R. K. (2009) Case study research: Design and methods. Sage Publications, Inc.

Zwahr, T., Finger, M. and Müller, P. (2005) ‘More than digitisation-The transformative potential

of e-governance: An exploratory case study’, In System Sciences, 2005. HICSS'05.

Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 127-127). IEEE.

Zhang, J. (2013) Towards a citizen-centered e-government: Exploring citizens' satisfaction with

e-government in China. Doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois University. Available from

ProQuest:

https://search.proquest.com/openview/779b13a52e70b97e56b8e9f3c7f4419c/1?pq-

origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

Zikmund, W. and Babin, B. (2006) Exploring marketing research. Cengage Learning.

References


Zouridis, S., and Thaens, M. (2003) ‘E-government: towards a public administration approach’,

Asian Journal of Public Administration, 25(2), pp. 159-183.

Appendices


APPENDICES

Appendices


Appendix 1 – Research Instruments (Pilot Survey)

Construct No. Questions

EGOV

Q1 People would learn to use the website very quickly

Q2 I found information on the website to be very useful

Q3 I found helpful features on the website for accomplishing my task

Q4 Through every step of navigation through the website, I found the website to consistently provide useful information

Q5 I found that the content in the website was organized appropriately

Q6 I found the design of the website visually pleasing

Q7 I found that various functions within the government department were properly not linked together (R )

Q8 I was able to save the transaction details for future reference

Q9 I was able to choose the manner in which I am sent reminders/notifications about my transaction

Q10 I was able to request information the way I wanted (i.e. on mobile devices or electronic mail) on the days I wanted to

TRANSPY

Q11 The government departments’ programs are implemented more transparently in the website.

Q12 The government departments’ decision making is transparently disclosed in the website.

Q13 The citizen can clearly see the progress and situation of the decision making through the website.

Q14 The government departments’ policies are seldom disclosed transparently on the website (R).

Q15 The government departments’ website discloses sufficient and reliable information to the citizen on its policies

ACOUNT

Q16 The government departments recognise their responsibilities towards all communities.

Q17 The government departments do not set clear operating goals to be achieved (R)

Q18 The government departments maintain detailed and up-to-date records.

Q19 The government departments foster collaboration with other related agencies.

Q20 The government departments ensure funds are used properly and in an authorized manner

TECH

Q21 The government departments use computer networks to connect all of its divisions.

Q22 The government departments are keen on providing network security in order to secure the information.

Q23 Data exchange is conducted with great ease among the government departments’ divisions through the available means

of communication.

EXPEC

Q24 Government departments show sincere interest in solving citizens’ problems

Q25 Government departments provide services at the time promised

Q26 Government departments maintain error-free records

Q27 Government departments inform citizens when services will be performed

Q28 Government departments offer prompt services to citizens

Q29 Government departments sometimes are not willing to help citizens (R)

Q30 Government departments readily respond to citizens’ request

Q31 Government departments able to instill confidence in citizens

Q32 Government departments ensure that citizens feel safe in their transactions

Q33 Government departments fail to ensure that employees are courteous at all times (R)

Q34 Government departments ensure that employees have the knowledge to answer citizens' questions

Q35 Government departments make sure that employees give personal attention to all

Q36 Government departments make sure that employees understand citizens' needs

TRANSF

Q37 In Government Departments new ideas are readily accepted.

Q38 In Government Departments management is quick to spot the need to do things differently.

Q39 In Government Departments response is quick when changes need to be made.

Q40 In Government Departments there is flexibility; they can quickly change procedures to meet new conditions and solve problems as they arise

Q41 In Government Departments assistance in developing new ideas is readily available.

PERFO

Q42 the performance of the e-government services related to finding information is excellent (e-information)

Q43 the performance of the e-government services related to completing transactions is efficient (e-transaction)

Q44 the performance related to public participating electronically is noticeable and visible (e-participation)

Q45 the overall performance of e-government services (e-performance) is effective and efficient

SATISF

Q46 I was satisfied with my experience when using e-government services while looking for information I needed (e-information)

Q47 I was satisfied with the experience I had while completing my e-government services transactions (e-transaction)

Q48 I was satisfied with the extent of my participating as a citizen electronically (e-participation)

Q49 I was satisfied with the extent of e-government services provided through multiple channels (e.g. websites; kiosks and

mobile phones)

Q50 overall I was satisfied with the services provided electronically (e-performance)

TRU_COF

Q51 I feel that government acts in citizen’s best interest.

Q52 I feel fine interacting with the government since government generally fulfills its duties efficiently

Q53 I am comfortable relying on the government to meet their obligations

Q54 I always feel confident that I can rely on government to do their part when I interact with them

Q55 I feel confident that the government department will do a good job providing the services that I used in the future

Appendices


Appendix 2 – Research Instruments (Main Survey)


EGOV

Q1 People would learn to use the government departments’ website very quickly.

Q2 I found information on the government departments’ website to be very useful.

Q3 I found helpful features on the government departments’ website for accomplishing my task.

Q4 Through every step of navigation through the website, I found the government departments’ website to consistently

provide useful information.

Q5 I found that the content in the government departments’ website was organized appropriately.

Q6 I found the design of the government departments’ website visually pleasing

Q7 I found that various within the government department were properly not linked together

Q8 I was able to save the transaction details for future reference.

Q9 I was able to choose the manner in which I am sent reminders/notifications about my transaction.

Q10 I was able to request for accessing information the way I wanted to (i.e. on mobile devices or electronic mail) on the

days I wanted to.

TRANSPY





ACOUNT





TECH



Q21 Data exchange is conducted with great ease among the government departments’ divisions through the available

means of communication.

EXPEC

Q22 The government departments show sincere interest in solving citizens’ problems

Q23 The government departments provide services at the time promised

Q24 The government departments maintain error-free records

Q25 The government departments inform citizens when services will be performed

Q26 The government departments offer prompt services to citizens

Q27 The government departments readily respond to citizens’ request

Q28 The government departments able to instill confidence in citizens

Q29 The government departments ensure that citizens feel safe in their transactions

Q30 The government departments ensure that employees have the knowledge to answer citizens' questions

Q31 The government departments make sure that employees give personal attention to all

Q32 The government departments make sure that employees understand citizens' needs

TRANSF

Q33 In government departments new ideas are readily accepted.

Q34 In government departments management is quick to spot the need to do things differently.

Q35 In government departments response is quick when changes need to be made.

Q36 In government departments there is flexibility; they can quickly change procedures to meet new conditions and solve problems as they arise

Q37 In government departments assistance in developing new ideas is readily available.

PERFO

Q38 the performance of the e-government services related to finding information is excellent

Q39 the performance of the e-government services related to completing transactions is efficient

Q40 the performance related to public participating electronically is noticeable and visible

Q41 the overall performance of e-government services is effective and efficient

SATISF

Q42 I was satisfied with my experience when using e-government services while looking for information I needed

Q43 I was satisfied with the experience I had while completing my e-government services transactions

Q44 I was satisfied with the extent of my participating as a citizen electronically

Q45 I was satisfied with the extent of e-government services provided through multiple channels

Q46 overall I was satisfied with the services provided electronically

TRU& COF

Q47 I feel that government acts in citizen’s best interest




Q51 I feel confident that the government department will do a good job providing the services that I used in the future.

Appendices


Appendix 3 – Research Instruments (following deletion of Q7)


EGOV




Q4 Through every step of navigation through the website, I found the government departments’ website to consistently

provide useful information.



Q7 I was able to save the transaction details for future reference.

Q8 I was able to choose the manner in which I am sent reminders/notifications about my transaction.

Q9 I was able to request for accessing information the way I wanted to (i.e. on mobile devices or electronic mail) on the

days I wanted to.

TRANSPY





ACOUNT





TECH



Q20 Data exchange is conducted with great ease among the government departments’ divisions through the available means of communication.

EXPEC












TRANSF




Q35 In government departments there is flexibility; they can quickly change procedures to meet new conditions and solve problems as they arise


PERFO





SATISF




Q44 I was satisfied with the extent of e-government services provided through multiple channels


TRU& COF





Q50 I feel confident that the government department will do a good job providing the services that I used in the future.

Appendices


Appendix 4 – Research Instruments (after data analysis)


EGOV




Q4 Through every step of navigation through the website, I found the government departments’ website to consistently provide useful information.



TRANSPY





ACOUNT





TECH



Q17 Data exchange is conducted with great ease among the government departments’ divisions through the available

means of communication.

EXPEC












TRANSF




Q32 In government departments there is flexibility; they can quickly change procedures to meet new conditions and solve

problems as they arise


PERFO





SATISF




Q41 I was satisfied with the extent of e-government services provided through multiple channels (e.g. websites; kiosks and mobile phones)


TRU& COF




Q46 I always feel confident that I can rely on government to do their part when I interact with them.

Q47 I feel confident that the government department will do a good job providing the services that I used in the future

Appendices


Appendix 5 – Research Ethics Approval

does digital transformation of government lead to enhanced citizens' trust and confidence in

Documents